Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > linux.kernel > #1354079
| From | Robert Richter <robert.richter@caviumnetworks.com> |
|---|---|
| Newsgroups | linux.kernel |
| Subject | Re: [PATCH v3 08/12] arm64, numa: rework numa_add_memblk() |
| Date | 2016-03-09 13:30 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <raLpw-7PW-21@gated-at.bofh.it> (permalink) |
| References | <qU2Zr-K2-5@gated-at.bofh.it> <qU2Zs-K2-25@gated-at.bofh.it> |
| Organization | linux.* mail to news gateway |
On 23.01.16 17:39:23, Hanjun Guo wrote:
> From: Hanjun Guo <hanjun.guo@linaro.org>
>
> Rework numa_add_memblk() to update the parameter "u64 size"
> to "u64 end", this will make it consistent with x86 and
> can simplify the code later.
>
> Updates for arch/arm64/mm/numa.c should squash to core NUMA
> patches from Ganapat.
>
> Signed-off-by: Hanjun Guo <hanjun.guo@linaro.org>
> ---
> arch/arm64/kernel/acpi_numa.c | 2 +-
> arch/arm64/kernel/of_numa.c | 2 +-
> arch/arm64/mm/numa.c | 12 ++++++------
> 3 files changed, 8 insertions(+), 8 deletions(-)
> diff --git a/arch/arm64/kernel/of_numa.c b/arch/arm64/kernel/of_numa.c
> index 2f9e34b..aa6f3a3 100644
> --- a/arch/arm64/kernel/of_numa.c
> +++ b/arch/arm64/kernel/of_numa.c
> @@ -168,7 +168,7 @@ static int __init early_init_parse_memory_node(unsigned long node)
> pr_debug("NUMA-DT: base = %llx , node = %u\n",
> base, nid);
>
> - if (numa_add_memblk(nid, base, size) < 0)
> + if (numa_add_memblk(nid, base, base + size) < 0)
> return -EINVAL;
> }
>
> diff --git a/arch/arm64/mm/numa.c b/arch/arm64/mm/numa.c
> index e974995..2b04b8a 100644
> --- a/arch/arm64/mm/numa.c
> +++ b/arch/arm64/mm/numa.c
> @@ -137,25 +137,25 @@ void numa_store_cpu_info(unsigned int cpu)
> * numa_add_memblk - Set node id to memblk
> * @nid: NUMA node ID of the new memblk
> * @start: Start address of the new memblk
> - * @size: Size of the new memblk
> + * @end: End address of the new memblk
Apart from my earlier comment, this is not exactly correct and may
cause confussion. The implementation here defines:
size == end - start
which is different to struct resource, where:
resource_size(res) == res->end - res->start + 1
Thus, @end here is the first address outside of memblk.
This is one more argument for keeping @size here.
-Robert
> *
> * RETURNS:
> * 0 on success, -errno on failure.
> */
> -int __init numa_add_memblk(int nid, u64 start, u64 size)
> +int __init numa_add_memblk(int nid, u64 start, u64 end)
> {
> int ret;
>
> - ret = memblock_set_node(start, size, &memblock.memory, nid);
> + ret = memblock_set_node(start, (end - start), &memblock.memory, nid);
> if (ret < 0) {
> pr_err("NUMA: memblock [0x%llx - 0x%llx] failed to add on node %d\n",
> - start, (start + size - 1), nid);
> + start, (end - 1), nid);
> return ret;
> }
>
> node_set(nid, numa_nodes_parsed);
> pr_info("NUMA: Adding memblock [0x%llx - 0x%llx] on node %d\n",
> - start, (start + size - 1), nid);
> + start, (end - 1), nid);
> return ret;
> }
Back to linux.kernel | Previous | Next — Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread
Re: [PATCH v3 08/12] arm64, numa: rework numa_add_memblk() Robert Richter <robert.richter@caviumnetworks.com> - 2016-03-09 13:30 +0100 Re: [PATCH v3 08/12] arm64, numa: rework numa_add_memblk() Hanjun Guo <hanjun.guo@linaro.org> - 2016-03-10 11:20 +0100
csiph-web