On Wed, Dec 26, 2018 at 9:13 PM Dan Williams <dan.j.williams@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > On Wed, Dec 26, 2018 at 8:11 PM Fengguang Wu <fengguang.wu@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > > On Wed, Dec 26, 2018 at 07:41:41PM -0800, Matthew Wilcox wrote: > > >On Wed, Dec 26, 2018 at 09:14:47PM +0800, Fengguang Wu wrote: > > >> From: Fan Du <fan.du@xxxxxxxxx> > > >> > > >> This is a hack to enumerate PMEM as NUMA nodes. > > >> It's necessary for current BIOS that don't yet fill ACPI HMAT table. > > >> > > >> WARNING: take care to backup. It is mutual exclusive with libnvdimm > > >> subsystem and can destroy ndctl managed namespaces. > > > > > >Why depend on firmware to present this "correctly"? It seems to me like > > >less effort all around to have ndctl label some namespaces as being for > > >this kind of use. > > > > Dave Hansen may be more suitable to answer your question. He posted > > patches to make PMEM NUMA node coexist with libnvdimm and ndctl: > > > > [PATCH 0/9] Allow persistent memory to be used like normal RAM > > https://lkml.org/lkml/2018/10/23/9 > > > > That depends on future BIOS. So we did this quick hack to test out > > PMEM NUMA node for the existing BIOS. > > No, it does not depend on a future BIOS. It is correct. We already have Dave's patches + Dan's patch (added target_node field) work on our machine which has SRAT. Thanks, Yang > > Willy, have a look here [1], here [2], and here [3] for the > work-in-progress ndctl takeover approach (actually 'daxctl' in this > case). > > [1]: https://lkml.org/lkml/2018/10/23/9 > [2]: https://lkml.org/lkml/2018/10/31/243 > [3]: https://lists.01.org/pipermail/linux-nvdimm/2018-November/018677.html >
