Re: [PATCH RFC] x86/smpboot: Set safer __max_logical_packages limit
- Date: Thu, 20 Apr 2017 17:40:37 +0200
- From: Vitaly Kuznetsov <vkuznets@xxxxxxxxxx>
- Subject: Re: [PATCH RFC] x86/smpboot: Set safer __max_logical_packages limit
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> writes:
> On Thu, Apr 20, 2017 at 03:24:53PM +0200, Vitaly Kuznetsov wrote:
>> In this patch I suggest we set __max_logical_packages based on the
>> max_physical_pkg_id and total_cpus,
> So my 4 socket 144 CPU system will then get max_physical_pkg_id=144,
> instead of 4.
> This wastes quite a bit of memory for the per-node arrays. Luckily most
> are just pointer arrays, but still, wasting 140*8 bytes for each of
>> this should be safe and cover all
>> possible cases. Alternatively, we may think about eliminating the concept
>> of __max_logical_packages completely and relying on max_physical_pkg_id/
>> total_cpus where we currently use topology_max_packages().
>> The issue could've been solved in Xen too I guess. CPUID returning
>> x86_max_cores can be tweaked to be the lowerest(?) possible number of
>> all logical packages of the guest.
> This is getting ludicrous. Xen is plain broken, and instead of fixing
> it, you propose to somehow deal with its obviously crack induced
> behaviour :-(
Totally agree and I don't like the solution I propose (and that's why
this is RFC)... The problem is that there are such Xen setups in the
wild and with the recent changes some guests will BUG() :-(
Alternatively, we can just remove the BUG() and do something with CPUs
which have their pkg >= __max_logical_packages, e.g. assign them to the
last package. Far from ideal but will help to avoid the regression.