Re: [RFC Patch V1 00/30] Enable memoryless node on x86 platforms
Nish Aravamudan <[email protected]> Fri, 18 Jul 2014 10:48:04 -0700
| Newsgroups | gmane.linux.kernel.mm,gmane.linux.hotplug.devel,gmane.linux.kernel |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <CAOhV88O9TnucGqmW_MbTwhBMmr8dwCfkFQDSP=GD3QSdeqF6Dw@mail.gmail.com> |
Hi David, On Mon, Jul 14, 2014 at 6:19 PM, David Rientjes <[email protected]> wrote: > > On Sat, 12 Jul 2014, Jiri Kosina wrote: > > > I am pretty sure I've seen ppc64 machine with memoryless NUMA node. > > > > Yes, Nishanth Aravamudan (now cc'd) has been working diligently on the > problems that have been encountered, including problems in generic kernel > code, on powerpc with memoryless nodes. Thanks for Cc'ing me on this discussion. I'm going to review Jiang's patchset now, as best I can, but yes I can confirm we see memoryless nodes somewhat frequently on powerpc under PowerVM, due to presumably hypervisor fragmentation (the reason isn't clear to an LPAR, as it's just given a topology). I agree with Dave Hansen that this seems like a "good thing" to try and figure out, unless KVM decides it's going to hide the underlying topology of a guest's memory from the guest -- which I think could lead (eventually) to confusing performance results. I believe I have also seen them in hardware on ia64 (cpu-only and memory-only drawers), but not sure if those specific models are in production still. Finally, I will say that in working on supporting memoryless nodes, I've come across what look like bugs in the NUMA code. Or more accurately, assumptions which aren't always true. So it's a useful exercise for that reason to. Thanks, Nish