On Wed, 9 May 2012, tip-bot for Peter Zijlstra wrote: > Commit-ID: 94c0dd3278dd3eae52eabf0fb77d472d0dd3e373 > Gitweb: http://git.kernel.org/tip/94c0dd3278dd3eae52eabf0fb77d472d0dd3e373 > Author: Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@xxxxxxxxx> > AuthorDate: Wed, 18 Apr 2012 19:04:17 +0200 > Committer: Ingo Molnar <mingo@xxxxxxxxxx> > CommitDate: Wed, 9 May 2012 13:28:59 +0200 > > x86/numa: Allow specifying node_distance() for numa=fake > > Allows emulating more interesting NUMA configurations like a quad > socket AMD Magny-Cour: > > "numa=fake=8:10,16,16,22,16,22,16,22, > 16,10,22,16,22,16,22,16, > 16,22,10,16,16,22,16,22, > 22,16,16,10,22,16,22,16, > 16,22,16,22,10,16,16,22, > 22,16,22,16,16,10,22,16, > 16,22,16,22,16,22,10,16, > 22,16,22,16,22,16,16,10" > > Which has a non-fully-connected topology. > I like this support and I'm pretty sure you used it to reproduce my problems with sched/numa locally, but I think it would be better to seperate it out as a different parameter such as slit=fake so that we can still use it to fake the SLIT of our NUMA machines without requiring numa=fake which provides no guarantees to break the nodes along physical boundaries. So without seperating it out into slit=fake, we can't change this information without changing the SLIT itself and that makes debugging harder. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-tip-commits" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
|