From: "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@zytor.com>
To: Tejun Heo <tj@kernel.org>
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, mingo@redhat.com,
tglx@linutronix.de, x86@kernel.org, eric.dumazet@gmail.com,
yinghai@kernel.org, brgerst@gmail.com, gorcunov@gmail.com,
penberg@kernel.org, shaohui.zheng@intel.com, rientjes@google.com
Subject: Re: [PATCHSET] x86: unify x86_32 and 64 NUMA init paths, take#4
Date: Thu, 30 Dec 2010 12:14:05 -0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <4D1CE80D.3050503@zytor.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1293731369-10851-1-git-send-email-tj@kernel.org>
On 12/30/2010 09:49 AM, Tejun Heo wrote:
>
> The only change from the last take[L] is that it's now based on
> tip/x86/numa. Unfortunately, some of the collisions weren't trivial
> and led to some ugliness.
>
> Commit c1c3443c ("x86, numa: Fake node-to-cpumask for NUMA emulation")
> introduced hard dependency on x86_64 into numa_add/remove_cpu() when
> CONFIG_NUMA_EMU is enabled. 0015 has been updated so that the 32/64
> bit common versions used when !CONFIG_NUMA_EMU are in numa.c while
> CONFIG_NUMA_EMU variants are in numa_64.c.
>
> This is ugly but still better than before. IIUC, Shaohui's patchsets
> is going to unify NUMA emulation across 32 and 64bit, which should
> remove the above ugliness. I haven't looked through the patchset yet
> but after skimming through the current NUMA_EMU code, here are some of
> my thoughts, FWIW.
>
> * There's no reason for different NUMA config methods to construct
> different data structures. They all, including 32bit, can build a
> single set of data structures.
>
> * Then, unification of NUMA_EMU would naturally follow. There's no
> reason to think about whether the underlying NUMA and proximity
> information is provided by ACPI, AMD or whatever. It just needs to
> manipulate the processed data.
>
> Let's _please_ head that way instead of adding more gluing codes and
> hacks everywhere. It would be a bit more churn but I don't think
> there's any other sustainable way.
>
Agreed 100%.
-hpa
--
H. Peter Anvin, Intel Open Source Technology Center
I work for Intel. I don't speak on their behalf.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2010-12-30 20:14 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 28+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2010-12-30 17:49 Tejun Heo
2010-12-30 17:49 ` [PATCH 01/16] x86: Kill unused static boot_cpu_logical_apicid in smpboot.c Tejun Heo
2011-01-11 3:48 ` David Rientjes
2010-12-30 17:49 ` [PATCH 02/16] x86: Rename x86_32 MAX_APICID to MAX_LOCAL_APIC Tejun Heo
2011-01-11 3:48 ` David Rientjes
2010-12-30 17:49 ` [PATCH 03/16] x86: Make default_send_IPI_mask_sequence/allbutself_logical() 32bit only Tejun Heo
2011-01-11 3:48 ` David Rientjes
2010-12-30 17:49 ` [PATCH 04/16] x86: Replace cpu_2_logical_apicid[] with early percpu variable Tejun Heo
2011-01-11 3:48 ` David Rientjes
2011-01-11 14:19 ` Tejun Heo
2010-12-30 17:49 ` [PATCH 05/16] x86: Always use x86_cpu_to_logical_apicid for cpu -> logical apic id Tejun Heo
2011-01-13 2:40 ` David Rientjes
2011-01-13 10:57 ` Tejun Heo
2010-12-30 17:49 ` [PATCH 06/16] x86: Kill apic->cpu_to_logical_apicid() Tejun Heo
2011-01-13 2:40 ` David Rientjes
2010-12-30 17:49 ` [PATCH 07/16] x86: Add apic->x86_32_early_logical_apicid() Tejun Heo
2010-12-30 17:49 ` [PATCH 08/16] x86: Implement the default x86_32_early_logical_apicid() Tejun Heo
2010-12-30 17:49 ` [PATCH 09/16] x86: Implement x86_32_early_logical_apicid() for bigsmp_32 Tejun Heo
2010-12-30 17:49 ` [PATCH 10/16] x86: Implement x86_32_early_logical_apicid() for summit_32 Tejun Heo
2010-12-30 17:49 ` [PATCH 11/16] x86: Implement x86_32_early_logical_apicid() for numaq_32 Tejun Heo
2010-12-30 17:49 ` [PATCH 12/16] x86: Replace apic->apicid_to_node() with ->x86_32_numa_cpu_node() Tejun Heo
2010-12-30 17:49 ` [PATCH 13/16] x86: Unify cpu/apicid <-> NUMA node mapping between 32 and 64bit Tejun Heo
2010-12-30 17:49 ` [PATCH 14/16] x86: Unify CPU -> " Tejun Heo
2010-12-30 17:49 ` [PATCH 15/16] x86: Unify node_to_cpumask_map handling " Tejun Heo
2010-12-30 17:49 ` [PATCH 16/16] x86: Unify NUMA initialization " Tejun Heo
2010-12-30 20:14 ` H. Peter Anvin [this message]
2011-01-21 18:16 ` [PATCHSET] x86: unify x86_32 and 64 NUMA init paths, take#4 Tejun Heo
2011-01-21 18:49 ` H. Peter Anvin
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=4D1CE80D.3050503@zytor.com \
--to=hpa@zytor.com \
--cc=brgerst@gmail.com \
--cc=eric.dumazet@gmail.com \
--cc=gorcunov@gmail.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mingo@redhat.com \
--cc=penberg@kernel.org \
--cc=rientjes@google.com \
--cc=shaohui.zheng@intel.com \
--cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
--cc=tj@kernel.org \
--cc=x86@kernel.org \
--cc=yinghai@kernel.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox
Powered by JetHome