On Wed, Jun 14, 2017 at 8:21 AM, Michael Bringmann <m...@linux.vnet.ibm.com> wrote:
> On a related note, we are discussing the addition of 2 new device-tree > properties > with Pete Heyrman and his fellows that should simplify the determination > of the > set of required nodes. > > * One property would provide the total/max number of nodes needed by the > kernel > on the current hardware. > Yes, that would be nice to have > * A second property would provide the total/max number of nodes that the > kernel > could use on any system to which it could be migrated. > > Not sure about this one, are you suggesting more memory can be added depending on the migration target? > These properties aren't available, yet, and it takes time to define new > properties > in the PAPR and have them implemented in pHyp and the kernel. As an > intermediary > step, the systems which are doing a lot of dynamic hot-add/hot-remove > configuration > could provide equivalent information to the PowerPC kernel with a command > line > parameter. The 'numa.c' code would then read this value and fill in the > necessary > entries in the 'node_possible_map'. > > Would you foresee any problems with using such a feature? > Balbir Singh
