From owner-svn-src-all@freebsd.org Mon Aug 26 16:34:47 2019 Return-Path: Delivered-To: svn-src-all@mailman.nyi.freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2610:1c1:1:606c::19:1]) by mailman.nyi.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id CD36BDFB02; Mon, 26 Aug 2019 16:34:47 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from kostikbel@gmail.com) Received: from kib.kiev.ua (kib.kiev.ua [IPv6:2001:470:d5e7:1::1]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) server-signature RSA-PSS (4096 bits)) (Client did not present a certificate) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 46HHfH3LKXz4d1F; Mon, 26 Aug 2019 16:34:46 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from kostikbel@gmail.com) Received: from tom.home (kib@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by kib.kiev.ua (8.15.2/8.15.2) with ESMTPS id x7QGYdG8008503 (version=TLSv1.3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256 verify=NO); Mon, 26 Aug 2019 19:34:42 +0300 (EEST) (envelope-from kostikbel@gmail.com) DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.10.3 kib.kiev.ua x7QGYdG8008503 Received: (from kostik@localhost) by tom.home (8.15.2/8.15.2/Submit) id x7QGYdjf008502; Mon, 26 Aug 2019 19:34:39 +0300 (EEST) (envelope-from kostikbel@gmail.com) X-Authentication-Warning: tom.home: kostik set sender to kostikbel@gmail.com using -f Date: Mon, 26 Aug 2019 19:34:39 +0300 From: Konstantin Belousov To: John Baldwin Cc: Conrad Meyer , src-committers , svn-src-all , svn-src-head Subject: Re: svn commit: r351456 - head/sys/amd64/amd64 Message-ID: <20190826163439.GS71821@kib.kiev.ua> References: <201908241528.x7OFSemm026182@repo.freebsd.org> <20190824161503.GA71821@kib.kiev.ua> <20190824204353.GH71821@kib.kiev.ua> <1a09a4ef-45aa-1bb2-5b16-1bde24df0f3d@FreeBSD.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <1a09a4ef-45aa-1bb2-5b16-1bde24df0f3d@FreeBSD.org> User-Agent: Mutt/1.12.1 (2019-06-15) X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.0 required=5.0 tests=ALL_TRUSTED,BAYES_00, DKIM_ADSP_CUSTOM_MED,FORGED_GMAIL_RCVD,FREEMAIL_FROM, NML_ADSP_CUSTOM_MED autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.2 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.2 (2018-09-13) on tom.home X-Rspamd-Queue-Id: 46HHfH3LKXz4d1F X-Spamd-Bar: ------ Authentication-Results: mx1.freebsd.org; none X-Spamd-Result: default: False [-6.90 / 15.00]; NEURAL_HAM_MEDIUM(-1.00)[-0.998,0]; NEURAL_HAM_SHORT(-0.90)[-0.897,0]; REPLY(-4.00)[]; NEURAL_HAM_LONG(-1.00)[-1.000,0] X-BeenThere: svn-src-all@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: "SVN commit messages for the entire src tree \(except for " user" and " projects" \)" List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 26 Aug 2019 16:34:47 -0000 On Mon, Aug 26, 2019 at 09:25:11AM -0700, John Baldwin wrote: > On 8/24/19 1:43 PM, Konstantin Belousov wrote: > > On Sat, Aug 24, 2019 at 11:47:52AM -0700, Conrad Meyer wrote: > >> On Sat, Aug 24, 2019 at 9:15 AM Konstantin Belousov wrote: > >>> > >>> On Sat, Aug 24, 2019 at 08:49:42AM -0700, Conrad Meyer wrote: > >>>> Hi Konstantin, > >>>> > >>>> What is the motivation for this change? The commit message doesn't > >>>> really describe why it was done. > >>> > >>> Really it does. There is no point to request allocations for e.g. > >>> doublefault stack to be at the local domain, because this stack is only > >>> used once. Doublefault is definitely a machine halt situation, it does > >>> not matter if it generates inter-socket traffic to handle. > >>> > >>> Same for boot stacks, and for mce. > >>> > >>> The change avoids unnecessary constraints. > >> > >> Sure, but what is the harm of the unnecessary constraints? Does this > >> change fix an actual bug, or is it just a stylistic preference to > >> avoid domain-specific allocations for infrequently used objects? > > I am not sure about this being a stylistic preference. We usually > > write code to express the required actions. I removed constraints > > which did not added anything neither to code correctness nor to the > > performance. > > Judging by the thread on current though, this fixes boot panics on > machines with NUMA but CPUs that don't have local memory, correct? > I think that's the thing Conrad is asking. > This was discovered later.