On Wed, May 17, 2017 at 04:35:58PM +0200, Robert Richter wrote: > On 17.05.17 14:46:54, Lorenzo Pieralisi wrote: > > > More explicitly, I think the whole series should work also with the diff > > below applied on top of it. Side note: for consistency, I do not think > > that adding a DT counterpart to pci_bus_find_numa_node() would hurt. > > > > Thanks ! > > Lorenzo > > > > -- >8 -- > > diff --git a/drivers/pci/probe.c b/drivers/pci/probe.c > > index 76c089f..cf0692c 100644 > > --- a/drivers/pci/probe.c > > +++ b/drivers/pci/probe.c > > @@ -862,7 +862,7 @@ static struct pci_bus *pci_alloc_child_bus(struct pci_bus *parent, > > */ > > child->dev.class = &pcibus_class; > > dev_set_name(&child->dev, "%04x:%02x", pci_domain_nr(child), busnr); > > - set_dev_node(&child->dev, dev_to_node(&parent->dev)); > > + > > Hmm, in device_add() there is already: > > /* use parent numa_node */ > if (parent && (dev_to_node(dev) == NUMA_NO_NODE)) > set_dev_node(dev, dev_to_node(parent)); > > So there are cases where the device has a different node than the > parent. I am not sure if we can assume for pci that it maps always. > > And since device_add() is called later anyway, the above change might > not necessary at all. That's why I _removed_ the set_dev_node() in the diff above (that applies to patch (2)), I do not think it is a) correct and b) necessary to propagate the NUMA node from bus to a child bus given that device_add() takes care of that already. I should post a v3 (with the diff above applied) so that we are all on the same page and we can test it. > But at least we must assign the node id to the > bridge, which is the parent. Maybe just have in > acpi_pci_root_create(): > > bridge = get_device(bus->bridge); > adev = to_acpi_device_node(bridge->fwnode); > set_dev_node(bridge, acpi_get_node(adev->handle)); I do not think that's enough, I need to check again but I think that also the bus->dev should have its NUMA node set for things to work (and allow the NUMA node to propagate correctly through device_add()) otherwise pcibus_to_node() would fail for devices sitting on the root bus, right ? I will check again and post v3 shortly. Thanks ! Lorenzo > > -Robert > > > > /* > > * Set up the primary, secondary and subordinate > > * bus numbers.
