mirror of
https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/stable/linux.git
synced 2024-10-31 16:38:12 +00:00
x86, numa: Assign CPUs to nodes in round-robin manner on fake NUMA
commitd9c2d5ac6a
"x86, numa: Use near(er) online node instead of roundrobin for NUMA" changed NUMA initialization on Intel to choose the nearest online node or first node. Fake NUMA would be better of with round-robin initialization, instead of the all CPUS on first node. Change the choice of first node, back to round-robin. For testing NUMA kernel behaviour without cpusets and NUMA aware applications, it would be better to have cpus in different nodes, rather than all in a single node. With cpusets migration of tasks scenarios cannot not be tested. I guess having it round-robin shouldn't affect the use cases for all cpus on the first node. The code comments in arch/x86/mm/numa_64.c:759 indicate that this used to be the case, which was changed by commitd9c2d5ac6
. It changed from roundrobin to nearer or first node. And I couldn't find any reason for this change in its changelog. Signed-off-by: Nikanth Karthikesan <knikanth@suse.de> Cc: David Rientjes <rientjes@google.com> Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
This commit is contained in:
parent
29979aa8bd
commit
50f2d7f682
1 changed files with 1 additions and 3 deletions
|
@ -284,9 +284,7 @@ static void __cpuinit srat_detect_node(struct cpuinfo_x86 *c)
|
|||
/* Don't do the funky fallback heuristics the AMD version employs
|
||||
for now. */
|
||||
node = apicid_to_node[apicid];
|
||||
if (node == NUMA_NO_NODE)
|
||||
node = first_node(node_online_map);
|
||||
else if (!node_online(node)) {
|
||||
if (node == NUMA_NO_NODE || !node_online(node)) {
|
||||
/* reuse the value from init_cpu_to_node() */
|
||||
node = cpu_to_node(cpu);
|
||||
}
|
||||
|
|
Loading…
Reference in a new issue