From: Robin Murphy <robin.murphy@arm.com>
To: Yunsheng Lin <linyunsheng@huawei.com>,
Christoph Hellwig <hch@infradead.org>
Cc: bhelgaas@google.com, linux-pci@vger.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, mhocko@kernel.org,
peterz@infradead.org, geert@linux-m68k.org,
gregkh@linuxfoundation.org, paul.burton@mips.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH] PCI: Warn about host bridge device when its numa node is NO_NODE
Date: Tue, 22 Oct 2019 14:55:35 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <e35bd451-bdb7-ec02-d691-aa3720d1e10b@arm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <96b8737d-5fbf-7942-bf10-7521cf954d6e@huawei.com>
On 21/10/2019 05:05, Yunsheng Lin wrote:
> On 2019/10/19 16:34, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
>> On Sat, Oct 19, 2019 at 02:45:43PM +0800, Yunsheng Lin wrote:
>>> + if (nr_node_ids > 1 && dev_to_node(bus->bridge) == NUMA_NO_NODE)
>>> + dev_err(bus->bridge, FW_BUG "No node assigned on NUMA capable HW by BIOS. Please contact your vendor for updates.\n");
>>> +
>>
>> The whole idea of mentioning a BIOS in architeture indepent code doesn't
>> make sense at all.
[ Come to think of it, I'm sure an increasing number of x86 firmwares
don't even implement a PC BIOS any more... ]
In all fairness, the server-class Arm-based machines I've come across so
far do seem to consistently call their EFI firmware images "BIOS"
despite the clear anachronism. At least the absurdity of conflating a
system setup program with a semiconductor process seems to have mostly
died out ;)
> Mentioning the BIOS is to tell user what firmware is broken, so that
> user can report this to their vendor by referring the specific firmware.
>
> It seems we can specific the node through different ways(DT, ACPI, etc).
>
> Is there a better name for mentioning instead of BIOS, or we should do
> the checking and warning in the architeture dependent code?
>
> Or maybe just remove the BIOS from the above log?
Even though there may be some degree of historical convention hanging
around on ACPI-based systems, that argument almost certainly doesn't
hold for OF/FDT/etc. - the "[Firmware Bug]:" prefix is hopefully
indicative enough, so I'd say just drop the "by BIOS" part.
Robin.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2019-10-22 13:56 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 15+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2019-10-19 6:45 Yunsheng Lin
2019-10-19 8:34 ` Christoph Hellwig
2019-10-21 4:05 ` Yunsheng Lin
2019-10-22 13:55 ` Robin Murphy [this message]
2019-10-23 8:24 ` Yunsheng Lin
2019-10-22 21:04 ` Bjorn Helgaas
2019-10-23 8:22 ` Yunsheng Lin
2019-10-23 17:10 ` Bjorn Helgaas
2019-10-24 9:20 ` Michal Hocko
2019-10-24 17:40 ` Bjorn Helgaas
2019-10-25 8:16 ` Michal Hocko
2019-10-25 8:51 ` Yunsheng Lin
2019-10-24 9:39 ` Yunsheng Lin
2019-10-24 10:16 ` Robin Murphy
2019-10-25 12:51 ` Bjorn Helgaas
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=e35bd451-bdb7-ec02-d691-aa3720d1e10b@arm.com \
--to=robin.murphy@arm.com \
--cc=bhelgaas@google.com \
--cc=geert@linux-m68k.org \
--cc=gregkh@linuxfoundation.org \
--cc=hch@infradead.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-pci@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linyunsheng@huawei.com \
--cc=mhocko@kernel.org \
--cc=paul.burton@mips.com \
--cc=peterz@infradead.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