On Thu, Nov 18, 2021 at 5:12 AM Jonathan Cameron <Jonathan.Cameron@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > On Fri, 29 Oct 2021 12:51:59 -0700 > Dan Williams <dan.j.williams@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > From: Alison Schofield <alison.schofield@xxxxxxxxx> > > > > During NUMA init, CXL memory defined in the SRAT Memory Affinity > > subtable may be assigned to a NUMA node. Since there is no > > requirement that the SRAT be comprehensive for CXL memory another > > mechanism is needed to assign NUMA nodes to CXL memory not identified > > in the SRAT. > > > > Use the CXL Fixed Memory Window Structure (CFMWS) of the ACPI CXL > > Early Discovery Table (CEDT) to find all CXL memory ranges. > > Create a NUMA node for each CFMWS that is not already assigned to > > a NUMA node. Add a memblk attaching its host physical address > > range to the node. > > > > Note that these ranges may not actually map any memory at boot time. > > They may describe persistent capacity or may be present to enable > > hot-plug. > > > > Consumers can use phys_to_target_node() to discover the NUMA node. > > > > Signed-off-by: Alison Schofield <alison.schofield@xxxxxxxxx> > > Signed-off-by: Dan Williams <dan.j.williams@xxxxxxxxx> > Hi, > > I was just discussing this with one of our firmware / ACPI experts and he asked > an interesting question. If you want to have CFMWS regions correspond to > new NUMA nodes, why not put them in SRAT as hotpluggable memory, but have none > present in the memory map (whichever route you use to get that)? > We do this for normal memory hotplug as (via the other discussion on qemu virtio-mem > nodes) apparently does qemu. > > https://lore.kernel.org/all/655c65af-fd7a-8007-37b3-a56c60a0ec5b@xxxxxxxxxx/ > > This doesn't solve the question of whether we have enough nodes, but it's > not worse than if we use CFMWS regions and fits within existing ACPI spec. > > The only reason I can immediately think of to not do this, is that it might be > a pain to later change over to dynamic numa node allocation in a fashion that > then ignores SRAT entries. Probably a solvable problem. Interesting, yes, that works for expanding the NUMA node number space. However, if you populate SRAT what do you put in the corresponding HMAT entries? In the case of dynamic CXL regions the driver is going to generate the equivalent of the corresponding HMAT data based on what devices it decides to place in that range. I actually do not know what happens with HMAT today for memory hotplug, but I suspect there are less degrees of freedom of what might populate those ranges than what CXL allows, and there is a chance to pre-populate the HMAT for future hotplug. All that said, if an ACPI platform did do that population it would not collide with the scheme proposed in this patch because this is checking SRAT for the range before padding the proximity domain number space for CFMWS entries.
