On 14.07.2022 12:49, Wei Chen wrote: >> From: Jan Beulich <[email protected]> >> Sent: 2022年7月14日 18:37 >> status >>>> >>>> Well, this makes the table complete, but it doesn't explain how you >> mean >>>> to fold the settings of the two command line options into one variable. >>>> >>> >>> No matter how many separate "numa=" parameters have been parsed from >>> Command line, the values of these original variables are determined >>> after parsing the command line. So the determined status can be mapped >>> to the new one variable from above table. >> >> Hmm, I was partly wrong - the initial values of both variables are >> indeed set from just the single "numa=" parsing. But later on they >> "evolve" independently, and multiple "numa=" on the command line >> can also have "interesting" effects. I'm afraid I still can't > > Can you provide some examples? This way I can better understand your > concerns.
Take bad_srat(): you convert "acpi_numa = -1" to setting numa_no_acpi. Yet imo (matching the present model) numa_off shouldn't be affected. While your change is fine in practice for (current) x86, it is wrong in the abstract model (which is relevant when making things common). Jan
