Hi Mike,
On Thu, 28 Nov 2024 07:03:33 +0000,
Mike Rapoport <rppt@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> Hi Marc,
>
> > diff --git a/drivers/base/arch_numa.c b/drivers/base/arch_numa.c
> > index e187016764265..5457248eb0811 100644
> > --- a/drivers/base/arch_numa.c
> > +++ b/drivers/base/arch_numa.c
> > @@ -207,7 +207,21 @@ static void __init setup_node_data(int nid, u64 start_pfn, u64 end_pfn)
> > static int __init numa_register_nodes(void)
> > {
> > int nid;
> > -
> > + struct memblock_region *mblk;
> > +
> > + /* Check that valid nid is set to memblks */
> > + for_each_mem_region(mblk) {
> > + int mblk_nid = memblock_get_region_node(mblk);
> > + phys_addr_t start = mblk->base;
> > + phys_addr_t end = mblk->base + mblk->size - 1;
> > +
> > + if (mblk_nid == NUMA_NO_NODE || mblk_nid >= MAX_NUMNODES) {
> > + pr_warn("Warning: invalid memblk node %d [mem %pap-%pap]\n",
> > + mblk_nid, &start, &end);
> > + return -EINVAL;
> > + }
>
> We have memblock_validate_numa_coverage() that checks that amount of memory
> with unset node id is less than a threshold. The loop here can be replaced
> with something like
>
> if (!memblock_validate_numa_coverage(0))
> return -EINVAL;
Unfortunately, that doesn't seem to result in something that works
(relevant extract only):
[ 0.000000] NUMA: no nodes coverage for 9MB of 65516MB RAM
[ 0.000000] NUMA: Faking a node at [mem 0x0000000000500000-0x0000000fff0fffff]
[ 0.000000] NUMA: no nodes coverage for 0MB of 65516MB RAM
[ 0.000000] Unable to handle kernel paging request at virtual address 0000000000001d40
Any idea?
M.
--
Without deviation from the norm, progress is not possible.
