Hi Michal On Wed, May 9, 2018 at 5:54 PM, Michal Hocko <mhocko@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On Wed 11-04-18 12:48:32, Michal Hocko wrote: >> Hi, >> my attention was brought to the %subj commit and either I am missing >> something or the patch is quite dubious. What is it actually trying to >> fix? If a BIOS/FW provides more memblocks than the limit then we would >> get misleading numa topology (numactl -H output) but is the situation >> much better with it applied? Numa init code will refuse to init more >> memblocks than the limit and falls back to dummy_numa_init (AFAICS) >> which will break the topology again and numactl -H will have a >> misleading output anyway. IIRC, the MEMBLOCK beyond max limit getting dropped from visible memory(partial drop from a node). this patch removed any upper limit on memblocks and allowed to parse all entries of SRAT. >> >> So why is the patch an improvement at all? > > ping? I would be tempted to simply revert the patch as a wrong fix. > -- > Michal Hocko > SUSE Labs thanks Ganapat sorry, somehow, i have missed your previous email -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-acpi" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
