Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > linux.kernel > #1233719 > unrolled thread

[PATCH RFC 2/5] powerpc:numa Rename functions referring to nid as chipid

Back to article view | Back to linux.kernel

This discussion starts older than the indexed window; earlier articles aren't shown. The article labeled Started by below is the oldest one visible, not the original post.

Contents

  [PATCH RFC  2/5] powerpc:numa Rename functions referring to nid as chipid Raghavendra K T <raghavendra.kt@linux.vnet.ibm.com> - 2015-09-27 20:30 +0200
    Re: [PATCH RFC  2/5] powerpc:numa Rename functions referring to nid  as chipid Nishanth Aravamudan <nacc@linux.vnet.ibm.com> - 2015-09-28 19:30 +0200
      Re: [PATCH RFC  2/5] powerpc:numa Rename functions referring to nid  as chipid Raghavendra K T <raghavendra.kt@linux.vnet.ibm.com> - 2015-09-29 20:40 +0200

#1233719 — [PATCH RFC 2/5] powerpc:numa Rename functions referring to nid as chipid

There is no change in the fuctionality

Signed-off-by: Raghavendra K T <raghavendra.kt@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
---
 arch/powerpc/mm/numa.c | 42 +++++++++++++++++++++---------------------
 1 file changed, 21 insertions(+), 21 deletions(-)

diff --git a/arch/powerpc/mm/numa.c b/arch/powerpc/mm/numa.c
index d5e6eee..f84ed2f 100644
--- a/arch/powerpc/mm/numa.c
+++ b/arch/powerpc/mm/numa.c
@@ -235,47 +235,47 @@ static void initialize_distance_lookup_table(int nid,
 	}
 }
 
-/* Returns nid in the range [0..MAX_NUMNODES-1], or -1 if no useful numa
+/* Returns chipid in the range [0..MAX_NUMNODES-1], or -1 if no useful numa
  * info is found.
  */
-static int associativity_to_nid(const __be32 *associativity)
+static int associativity_to_chipid(const __be32 *associativity)
 {
-	int nid = -1;
+	int chipid = -1;
 
 	if (min_common_depth == -1)
 		goto out;
 
 	if (of_read_number(associativity, 1) >= min_common_depth)
-		nid = of_read_number(&associativity[min_common_depth], 1);
+		chipid = of_read_number(&associativity[min_common_depth], 1);
 
 	/* POWER4 LPAR uses 0xffff as invalid node */
-	if (nid == 0xffff || nid >= MAX_NUMNODES)
-		nid = -1;
+	if (chipid == 0xffff || chipid >= MAX_NUMNODES)
+		chipid = -1;
 
-	if (nid > 0 &&
+	if (chipid > 0 &&
 		of_read_number(associativity, 1) >= distance_ref_points_depth) {
 		/*
 		 * Skip the length field and send start of associativity array
 		 */
-		initialize_distance_lookup_table(nid, associativity + 1);
+		initialize_distance_lookup_table(chipid, associativity + 1);
 	}
 
 out:
-	return nid;
+	return chipid;
 }
 
-/* Returns the nid associated with the given device tree node,
+/* Returns the chipid associated with the given device tree node,
  * or -1 if not found.
  */
-static int of_node_to_nid_single(struct device_node *device)
+static int of_node_to_chipid_single(struct device_node *device)
 {
-	int nid = -1;
+	int chipid = -1;
 	const __be32 *tmp;
 
 	tmp = of_get_associativity(device);
 	if (tmp)
-		nid = associativity_to_nid(tmp);
-	return nid;
+		chipid = associativity_to_chipid(tmp);
+	return chipid;
 }
 
 /* Walk the device tree upwards, looking for an associativity id */
@@ -286,7 +286,7 @@ int of_node_to_nid(struct device_node *device)
 
 	of_node_get(device);
 	while (device) {
-		nid = of_node_to_nid_single(device);
+		nid = of_node_to_chipid_single(device);
 		if (nid != -1)
 			break;
 
@@ -498,7 +498,7 @@ static int of_get_assoc_arrays(struct device_node *memory,
 }
 
 /*
- * This is like of_node_to_nid_single() for memory represented in the
+ * This is like of_node_to_chipid_single() for memory represented in the
  * ibm,dynamic-reconfiguration-memory node.
  */
 static int of_drconf_to_nid_single(struct of_drconf_cell *drmem,
@@ -557,7 +557,7 @@ static int numa_setup_cpu(unsigned long lcpu)
 			goto out;
 	}
 
-	nid = of_node_to_nid_single(cpu);
+	nid = of_node_to_chipid_single(cpu);
 
 out_present:
 	if (nid < 0 || !node_online(nid))
@@ -754,7 +754,7 @@ static int __init parse_numa_properties(void)
 
 		cpu = of_get_cpu_node(i, NULL);
 		BUG_ON(!cpu);
-		nid = of_node_to_nid_single(cpu);
+		nid = of_node_to_chipid_single(cpu);
 		of_node_put(cpu);
 
 		/*
@@ -796,7 +796,7 @@ new_range:
 		 * have associativity properties.  If none, then
 		 * everything goes to default_nid.
 		 */
-		nid = of_node_to_nid_single(memory);
+		nid = of_node_to_chipid_single(memory);
 		if (nid < 0)
 			nid = default_nid;
 
@@ -1119,7 +1119,7 @@ static int hot_add_node_scn_to_nid(unsigned long scn_addr)
 			if ((scn_addr < start) || (scn_addr >= (start + size)))
 				continue;
 
-			nid = of_node_to_nid_single(memory);
+			nid = of_node_to_chipid_single(memory);
 			break;
 		}
 
@@ -1415,7 +1415,7 @@ int arch_update_cpu_topology(void)
 
 		/* Use associativity from first thread for all siblings */
 		vphn_get_associativity(cpu, associativity);
-		new_nid = associativity_to_nid(associativity);
+		new_nid = associativity_to_chipid(associativity);
 		if (new_nid < 0 || !node_online(new_nid))
 			new_nid = first_online_node;
 
-- 
1.7.11.7

--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/

[toc] | [next] | [standalone]

#1234310 — Re: [PATCH RFC 2/5] powerpc:numa Rename functions referring to nid as chipid

On 27.09.2015 [23:59:10 +0530], Raghavendra K T wrote:
> There is no change in the fuctionality
> 
> Signed-off-by: Raghavendra K T <raghavendra.kt@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
> ---
>  arch/powerpc/mm/numa.c | 42 +++++++++++++++++++++---------------------
>  1 file changed, 21 insertions(+), 21 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/arch/powerpc/mm/numa.c b/arch/powerpc/mm/numa.c
> index d5e6eee..f84ed2f 100644
> --- a/arch/powerpc/mm/numa.c
> +++ b/arch/powerpc/mm/numa.c
> @@ -235,47 +235,47 @@ static void initialize_distance_lookup_table(int nid,
>  	}
>  }
> 
> -/* Returns nid in the range [0..MAX_NUMNODES-1], or -1 if no useful numa
> +/* Returns chipid in the range [0..MAX_NUMNODES-1], or -1 if no useful numa
>   * info is found.
>   */
> -static int associativity_to_nid(const __be32 *associativity)
> +static int associativity_to_chipid(const __be32 *associativity)

This is confusing to me. This function is also used by the DLPAR code
under PowerVM to indicate what node the CPU is on -- not a chip (which I
don't believe is exposed at all under PowerVM).

>  {
> -	int nid = -1;
> +	int chipid = -1;
> 
>  	if (min_common_depth == -1)
>  		goto out;
> 
>  	if (of_read_number(associativity, 1) >= min_common_depth)
> -		nid = of_read_number(&associativity[min_common_depth], 1);
> +		chipid = of_read_number(&associativity[min_common_depth], 1);

Doesn't this, in the PAPR documentation, specifically refer to the NODE
level domain?

>  	/* POWER4 LPAR uses 0xffff as invalid node */
> -	if (nid == 0xffff || nid >= MAX_NUMNODES)
> -		nid = -1;
> +	if (chipid == 0xffff || chipid >= MAX_NUMNODES)
> +		chipid = -1;
> 
> -	if (nid > 0 &&
> +	if (chipid > 0 &&
>  		of_read_number(associativity, 1) >= distance_ref_points_depth) {
>  		/*
>  		 * Skip the length field and send start of associativity array
>  		 */
> -		initialize_distance_lookup_table(nid, associativity + 1);
> +		initialize_distance_lookup_table(chipid, associativity + 1);
>  	}
> 
>  out:
> -	return nid;
> +	return chipid;
>  }
> 
> -/* Returns the nid associated with the given device tree node,
> +/* Returns the chipid associated with the given device tree node,
>   * or -1 if not found.
>   */
> -static int of_node_to_nid_single(struct device_node *device)
> +static int of_node_to_chipid_single(struct device_node *device)
>  {
> -	int nid = -1;
> +	int chipid = -1;
>  	const __be32 *tmp;
> 
>  	tmp = of_get_associativity(device);
>  	if (tmp)
> -		nid = associativity_to_nid(tmp);
> -	return nid;
> +		chipid = associativity_to_chipid(tmp);
> +	return chipid;
>  }
> 
>  /* Walk the device tree upwards, looking for an associativity id */
> @@ -286,7 +286,7 @@ int of_node_to_nid(struct device_node *device)
> 
>  	of_node_get(device);
>  	while (device) {
> -		nid = of_node_to_nid_single(device);
> +		nid = of_node_to_chipid_single(device);
>  		if (nid != -1)
>  			break;
> 
> @@ -498,7 +498,7 @@ static int of_get_assoc_arrays(struct device_node *memory,
>  }
> 
>  /*
> - * This is like of_node_to_nid_single() for memory represented in the
> + * This is like of_node_to_chipid_single() for memory represented in the
>   * ibm,dynamic-reconfiguration-memory node.
>   */
>  static int of_drconf_to_nid_single(struct of_drconf_cell *drmem,
> @@ -557,7 +557,7 @@ static int numa_setup_cpu(unsigned long lcpu)
>  			goto out;
>  	}
> 
> -	nid = of_node_to_nid_single(cpu);
> +	nid = of_node_to_chipid_single(cpu);
> 
>  out_present:
>  	if (nid < 0 || !node_online(nid))
> @@ -754,7 +754,7 @@ static int __init parse_numa_properties(void)
> 
>  		cpu = of_get_cpu_node(i, NULL);
>  		BUG_ON(!cpu);
> -		nid = of_node_to_nid_single(cpu);
> +		nid = of_node_to_chipid_single(cpu);
>  		of_node_put(cpu);
> 
>  		/*
> @@ -796,7 +796,7 @@ new_range:
>  		 * have associativity properties.  If none, then
>  		 * everything goes to default_nid.
>  		 */
> -		nid = of_node_to_nid_single(memory);
> +		nid = of_node_to_chipid_single(memory);
>  		if (nid < 0)
>  			nid = default_nid;
> 
> @@ -1119,7 +1119,7 @@ static int hot_add_node_scn_to_nid(unsigned long scn_addr)
>  			if ((scn_addr < start) || (scn_addr >= (start + size)))
>  				continue;
> 
> -			nid = of_node_to_nid_single(memory);
> +			nid = of_node_to_chipid_single(memory);
>  			break;
>  		}
> 
> @@ -1415,7 +1415,7 @@ int arch_update_cpu_topology(void)
> 
>  		/* Use associativity from first thread for all siblings */
>  		vphn_get_associativity(cpu, associativity);
> -		new_nid = associativity_to_nid(associativity);
> +		new_nid = associativity_to_chipid(associativity);

If you are getting a chipid, shouldn't you be assigning it to a variable
called 'new_chipid'?

>  		if (new_nid < 0 || !node_online(new_nid))
>  			new_nid = first_online_node;
> 
> -- 
> 1.7.11.7
> 

--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#1235477 — Re: [PATCH RFC 2/5] powerpc:numa Rename functions referring to nid as chipid

On 09/28/2015 10:57 PM, Nishanth Aravamudan wrote:
> On 27.09.2015 [23:59:10 +0530], Raghavendra K T wrote:
>> There is no change in the fuctionality
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Raghavendra K T <raghavendra.kt@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
>> ---
>>   arch/powerpc/mm/numa.c | 42 +++++++++++++++++++++---------------------
>>   1 file changed, 21 insertions(+), 21 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/arch/powerpc/mm/numa.c b/arch/powerpc/mm/numa.c
>> index d5e6eee..f84ed2f 100644
>> --- a/arch/powerpc/mm/numa.c
>> +++ b/arch/powerpc/mm/numa.c
>> @@ -235,47 +235,47 @@ static void initialize_distance_lookup_table(int nid,
>>   	}
>>   }
>>
>> -/* Returns nid in the range [0..MAX_NUMNODES-1], or -1 if no useful numa
>> +/* Returns chipid in the range [0..MAX_NUMNODES-1], or -1 if no useful numa
>>    * info is found.
>>    */
>> -static int associativity_to_nid(const __be32 *associativity)
>> +static int associativity_to_chipid(const __be32 *associativity)
>
> This is confusing to me. This function is also used by the DLPAR code
> under PowerVM to indicate what node the CPU is on -- not a chip (which I
> don't believe is exposed at all under PowerVM).
>

Good point.

should I retain the name nid?
or any suggestions? instead of chipid -> nid which fits both the cases.
or should I rename like nid->vnid  something?
[...]
>> @@ -1415,7 +1415,7 @@ int arch_update_cpu_topology(void)
>>
>>   		/* Use associativity from first thread for all siblings */
>>   		vphn_get_associativity(cpu, associativity);
>> -		new_nid = associativity_to_nid(associativity);
>> +		new_nid = associativity_to_chipid(associativity);
>
> If you are getting a chipid, shouldn't you be assigning it to a variable
> called 'new_chipid'?

yes perhaps.
my splitting idea was
1. change nid name in functions to chipid (without changing nid
variable calling that function)
2. rename variables to chipid and assign nid=chipid (1:1 mapping)
3. now let nid = mapped chipid

But I see that it isn't consistent in some places. do you think
merging step 1 and step 2 is okay?

--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/

[toc] | [prev] | [standalone]

Back to top | Article view | linux.kernel

csiph-web