[PATCH 1/2] numa: Add simple generic NUMA emulation

[Jonathan Cameron]

On Thu, 8 Aug 2024 12:56:44 +0100
Tvrtko Ursulin <tvrtko.ursulin at igalia.com> wrote:

> [Please excuse the re-send, but as I heard nothing concern is it did not 
> get lost in your busy mailbox.]
> 
> Hi Greg,
> 
> Gentle reminder on the opens from this thread. Let me re-summarise the 
> question below:
> 
> On 26/06/2024 12:47, Tvrtko Ursulin wrote:
> > 
> > Hi Greg,
> > 
> > On 26/06/2024 08:38, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote:  
> >> On Tue, Jun 25, 2024 at 01:58:02PM +0100, Tvrtko Ursulin wrote:  
> >>> From: Maíra Canal <mcanal at igalia.com>
> >>>
> >>> Add some common code for splitting the memory into N emulated NUMA 
> >>> memory
> >>> nodes.
> >>>
> >>> Individual architecture can then enable selecting this option and use 
> >>> the
> >>> existing numa=fake=<N> kernel argument to enable it.
> >>>
> >>> Memory is always split into equally sized chunks.
> >>>
> >>> Signed-off-by: Maíra Canal <mcanal at igalia.com>
> >>> Signed-off-by: Tvrtko Ursulin <tvrtko.ursulin at igalia.com>
> >>> Co-developed-by: Tvrtko Ursulin <tvrtko.ursulin at igalia.com>
> >>> Cc: Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas at arm.com>
> >>> Cc: Will Deacon <will at kernel.org>
> >>> Cc: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh at linuxfoundation.org>
> >>> Cc: “Rafael J. Wysocki" <rafael at kernel.org>
> >>> ---
> >>>   drivers/base/Kconfig          |  7 ++++
> >>>   drivers/base/Makefile         |  1 +
> >>>   drivers/base/arch_numa.c      |  6 ++++
> >>>   drivers/base/numa_emulation.c | 67 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> >>>   drivers/base/numa_emulation.h | 21 +++++++++++  
> >>
> >> Why not just properly describe the numa topology in your bootloader or
> >> device tree and not need any such "fake" stuff at all?
> >>
> >> Also, you are now asking me to maintain these new files, not something
> >> I'm comfortable doing at all sorry.  
> > 
> > Mostly because ae3c107cd8be ("numa: Move numa implementation to common 
> > code") and existing common code in drivers/base/arch_numa.c it appeared 
> > it could be acceptable to add the simple NUMA emulation into the common 
> > code too. Then building upon the same concept as on x86 where no need 
> > for firmware changes is needed for experimenting with different 
> > configurations.
> > 
> > Would folding into arch_numa.c so no new files are added address your 
> > concern, or your main issue is the emulation in general?  
> 
> Re-iterating and slightly re-formulating this question I see three options:
> 
> a)
> Fold the new simple generic code into the existing arch_numa.c, 
> addressing the "no new files" objection, if that was the main objection.
> 
> b)
> Move completely into arch code - aka you don't want to see it under 
> drivers/base at all, ever, regardless of how simple the new code is, or 
> that common NUMA code is already there.
> 
> c)
> Strong nack for either a) or b) - so "do it in the firmware" comment.
> 
> Trying to understand your position so we can progress this.

See: 
https://lore.kernel.org/all/20240807064110.1003856-20-rppt@kernel.org/
and rest of thread 
https://lore.kernel.org/all/20240807064110.1003856-1-rppt@kernel.org/
[PATCH v4 00/26] mm: introduce numa_memblks

Much larger rework and unification set from Mike Rapoport
that happens to end up adding numa emulation as part of making
the x86 numa_memblk work for arm64 etc.

It's in mm-unstable now so getting some test coverage etc.

Sorry, I'd kind of assumed this also went to linux-mm so
the connection would have been made.

Jonathan


> 
> Thanks,
> 
> Tvrtko
> 
> >   
> >  >> +    if (str_has_prefix(opt, "fake="))
> >  >> +        return numa_emu_cmdline(opt + 5);  
> >  >
> >  > You did not document this at all :(  
> > 
> > That was indeed an oversight. Just need to "copy with edits" some stuff 
> > from Documentation/arch/x86/x86_64/boot-options.rst.
> > 
> > Regards,
> > 
> > Tvrtko  
>