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

Groups > linux.kernel > #1407357 > unrolled thread

[PATCH 3/3] arm64/numa: fix type info

Started byZhen Lei <thunder.leizhen@huawei.com>
First post2016-05-26 04:50 +0200
Last post2016-05-27 04:40 +0200
Articles 5 — 5 participants

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 3/3] arm64/numa: fix type info Zhen Lei <thunder.leizhen@huawei.com> - 2016-05-26 04:50 +0200
    Re: [PATCH 3/3] arm64/numa: fix type info Ganapatrao Kulkarni <gpkulkarni@gmail.com> - 2016-05-26 18:30 +0200
      Re: [PATCH 3/3] arm64/numa: fix type info Joe Perches <joe@perches.com> - 2016-05-26 18:40 +0200
        Re: [PATCH 3/3] arm64/numa: fix type info David Daney <ddaney.cavm@gmail.com> - 2016-05-26 19:20 +0200
          Re: [PATCH 3/3] arm64/numa: fix type info "Leizhen (ThunderTown)" <thunder.leizhen@huawei.com> - 2016-05-27 04:40 +0200

#1407357 — [PATCH 3/3] arm64/numa: fix type info

FromZhen Lei <thunder.leizhen@huawei.com>
Date2016-05-26 04:50 +0200
Subject[PATCH 3/3] arm64/numa: fix type info
Message-ID<rCTwZ-wH-1@gated-at.bofh.it>
numa_init(of_numa_init) may returned error because of numa configuration
error. So "No NUMA configuration found" is inaccurate. In fact, specific
configuration error information can be immediately printed by the
testing branch. So "No NUMA..." only needs to be printed when numa_off.

Signed-off-by: Zhen Lei <thunder.leizhen@huawei.com>
---
 arch/arm64/mm/numa.c | 3 ++-
 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)

diff --git a/arch/arm64/mm/numa.c b/arch/arm64/mm/numa.c
index 98dc104..9937cc1 100644
--- a/arch/arm64/mm/numa.c
+++ b/arch/arm64/mm/numa.c
@@ -362,7 +362,8 @@ static int __init dummy_numa_init(void)
 	int ret;
 	struct memblock_region *mblk;

-	pr_info("%s\n", "No NUMA configuration found");
+	if (numa_off)
+		pr_info("%s\n", "No NUMA configuration found");
 	pr_info("NUMA: Faking a node at [mem %#018Lx-%#018Lx]\n",
 	       0LLU, PFN_PHYS(max_pfn) - 1);

--
2.5.0

[toc] | [next] | [standalone]

#1407623

FromGanapatrao Kulkarni <gpkulkarni@gmail.com>
Date2016-05-26 18:30 +0200
Message-ID<rD6ky-dV-13@gated-at.bofh.it>
In reply to#1407357
On Wed, May 25, 2016 at 7:43 PM, Zhen Lei <thunder.leizhen@huawei.com> wrote:
> numa_init(of_numa_init) may returned error because of numa configuration
> error. So "No NUMA configuration found" is inaccurate. In fact, specific
> configuration error information can be immediately printed by the
> testing branch. So "No NUMA..." only needs to be printed when numa_off.
>
> Signed-off-by: Zhen Lei <thunder.leizhen@huawei.com>
> ---
>  arch/arm64/mm/numa.c | 3 ++-
>  1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
>
> diff --git a/arch/arm64/mm/numa.c b/arch/arm64/mm/numa.c
> index 98dc104..9937cc1 100644
> --- a/arch/arm64/mm/numa.c
> +++ b/arch/arm64/mm/numa.c
> @@ -362,7 +362,8 @@ static int __init dummy_numa_init(void)
>         int ret;
>         struct memblock_region *mblk;
>
> -       pr_info("%s\n", "No NUMA configuration found");
> +       if (numa_off)

IIRC, it should be
if (!numa_off)
we want to print this message when we failed to find proper numa configuration.
when numa_off is set, we will not look for any numa configuration.

> +               pr_info("%s\n", "No NUMA configuration found");
>         pr_info("NUMA: Faking a node at [mem %#018Lx-%#018Lx]\n",
>                0LLU, PFN_PHYS(max_pfn) - 1);
>
> --
> 2.5.0

ganapat
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> linux-arm-kernel mailing list
> linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
> http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel

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

#1407627

FromJoe Perches <joe@perches.com>
Date2016-05-26 18:40 +0200
Message-ID<rD6ue-iv-21@gated-at.bofh.it>
In reply to#1407623
On Thu, 2016-05-26 at 09:22 -0700, Ganapatrao Kulkarni wrote:
> On Wed, May 25, 2016 at 7:43 PM, Zhen Lei <thunder.leizhen@huawei.com> wrote:
> > numa_init(of_numa_init) may returned error because of numa configuration
> > error. So "No NUMA configuration found" is inaccurate. In fact, specific
> > configuration error information can be immediately printed by the
> > testing branch. So "No NUMA..." only needs to be printed when numa_off.
[]
> > diff --git a/arch/arm64/mm/numa.c b/arch/arm64/mm/numa.c
[]
> > @@ -362,7 +362,8 @@ static int __init dummy_numa_init(void)
> >         int ret;
> >         struct memblock_region *mblk;
> > 
> > -       pr_info("%s\n", "No NUMA configuration found");
> > +       if (numa_off)
> IIRC, it should be
> if (!numa_off)
> we want to print this message when we failed to find proper numa configuration.
> when numa_off is set, we will not look for any numa configuration.
> 
> > 
> > +               pr_info("%s\n", "No NUMA configuration found");

trivia:

Using printk("%s\n", "string") just makes the object code larger
for no particular benefit.

	pr_info("No NUMA configuration found\n");

would be smaller, faster and more intelligible for humans too.

Maybe something like this:
---
 arch/arm64/mm/numa.c | 41 ++++++++++++++++++++---------------------
 1 file changed, 20 insertions(+), 21 deletions(-)

diff --git a/arch/arm64/mm/numa.c b/arch/arm64/mm/numa.c
index 98dc104..2042452 100644
--- a/arch/arm64/mm/numa.c
+++ b/arch/arm64/mm/numa.c
@@ -17,6 +17,8 @@
  * along with this program.  If not, see <http://www.gnu.org/licenses/>.
  */
 
+#define pr_fmt(fmt) "NUMA: " fmt
+
 #include <linux/bootmem.h>
 #include <linux/memblock.h>
 #include <linux/module.h>
@@ -36,7 +38,7 @@ static __init int numa_parse_early_param(char *opt)
 	if (!opt)
 		return -EINVAL;
 	if (!strncmp(opt, "off", 3)) {
-		pr_info("%s\n", "NUMA turned off");
+		pr_info("NUMA turned off\n");
 		numa_off = 1;
 	}
 	return 0;
@@ -107,7 +109,7 @@ static void __init setup_node_to_cpumask_map(void)
 		set_cpu_numa_node(cpu, NUMA_NO_NODE);
 
 	/* cpumask_of_node() will now work */
-	pr_debug("NUMA: Node to cpumask map for %d nodes\n", nr_node_ids);
+	pr_debug("Node to cpumask map for %d nodes\n", nr_node_ids);
 }
 
 /*
@@ -142,14 +144,14 @@ int __init numa_add_memblk(int nid, u64 start, u64 size)
 
 	ret = memblock_set_node(start, size, &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);
+		pr_err("memblock [0x%llx - 0x%llx] failed to add on node %d\n",
+		       start, (start + size - 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);
+	pr_info("Adding memblock [0x%llx - 0x%llx] on node %d\n",
+		start, (start + size - 1), nid);
 	return ret;
 }
 
@@ -163,19 +165,18 @@ static void __init setup_node_data(int nid, u64 start_pfn, u64 end_pfn)
 	void *nd;
 	int tnid;
 
-	pr_info("NUMA: Initmem setup node %d [mem %#010Lx-%#010Lx]\n",
-			nid, start_pfn << PAGE_SHIFT,
-			(end_pfn << PAGE_SHIFT) - 1);
+	pr_info("Initmem setup node %d [mem %#010Lx-%#010Lx]\n",
+		nid, start_pfn << PAGE_SHIFT, (end_pfn << PAGE_SHIFT) - 1);
 
 	nd_pa = memblock_alloc_try_nid(nd_size, SMP_CACHE_BYTES, nid);
 	nd = __va(nd_pa);
 
 	/* report and initialize */
-	pr_info("NUMA: NODE_DATA [mem %#010Lx-%#010Lx]\n",
+	pr_info("NODE_DATA [mem %#010Lx-%#010Lx]\n",
 		nd_pa, nd_pa + nd_size - 1);
 	tnid = early_pfn_to_nid(nd_pa >> PAGE_SHIFT);
 	if (tnid != nid)
-		pr_info("NUMA: NODE_DATA(%d) on node %d\n", nid, tnid);
+		pr_info("NODE_DATA(%d) on node %d\n", nid, tnid);
 
 	node_data[nid] = nd;
 	memset(NODE_DATA(nid), 0, sizeof(pg_data_t));
@@ -232,8 +233,7 @@ static int __init numa_alloc_distance(void)
 			numa_distance[i * numa_distance_cnt + j] = i == j ?
 				LOCAL_DISTANCE : REMOTE_DISTANCE;
 
-	pr_debug("NUMA: Initialized distance table, cnt=%d\n",
-			numa_distance_cnt);
+	pr_debug("Initialized distance table, cnt=%d\n", numa_distance_cnt);
 
 	return 0;
 }
@@ -254,20 +254,20 @@ static int __init numa_alloc_distance(void)
 void __init numa_set_distance(int from, int to, int distance)
 {
 	if (!numa_distance) {
-		pr_warn_once("NUMA: Warning: distance table not allocated yet\n");
+		pr_warn_once("Warning: distance table not allocated yet\n");
 		return;
 	}
 
 	if (from >= numa_distance_cnt || to >= numa_distance_cnt ||
 			from < 0 || to < 0) {
-		pr_warn_once("NUMA: Warning: node ids are out of bound, from=%d to=%d distance=%d\n",
-			    from, to, distance);
+		pr_warn_once("Warning: node ids are out of bound, from=%d to=%d distance=%d\n",
+			     from, to, distance);
 		return;
 	}
 
 	if ((u8)distance != distance ||
 	    (from == to && distance != LOCAL_DISTANCE)) {
-		pr_warn_once("NUMA: Warning: invalid distance parameter, from=%d to=%d distance=%d\n",
+		pr_warn_once("Warning: invalid distance parameter, from=%d to=%d distance=%d\n",
 			     from, to, distance);
 		return;
 	}
@@ -294,7 +294,7 @@ static int __init numa_register_nodes(void)
 	/* Check that valid nid is set to memblks */
 	for_each_memblock(memory, mblk)
 		if (mblk->nid == NUMA_NO_NODE || mblk->nid >= MAX_NUMNODES) {
-			pr_warn("NUMA: Warning: invalid memblk node %d [mem %#010Lx-%#010Lx]\n",
+			pr_warn("Warning: invalid memblk node %d [mem %#010Lx-%#010Lx]\n",
 				mblk->nid, mblk->base,
 				mblk->base + mblk->size - 1);
 			return -EINVAL;
@@ -362,9 +362,8 @@ static int __init dummy_numa_init(void)
 	int ret;
 	struct memblock_region *mblk;
 
-	pr_info("%s\n", "No NUMA configuration found");
-	pr_info("NUMA: Faking a node at [mem %#018Lx-%#018Lx]\n",
-	       0LLU, PFN_PHYS(max_pfn) - 1);
+	pr_info("No NUMA configuration found - faking a node at [mem %#018Lx-%#018Lx]\n",
+		0LLU, PFN_PHYS(max_pfn) - 1);
 
 	for_each_memblock(memory, mblk) {
 		ret = numa_add_memblk(0, mblk->base, mblk->size);

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

#1407644

FromDavid Daney <ddaney.cavm@gmail.com>
Date2016-05-26 19:20 +0200
Message-ID<rD76W-KM-15@gated-at.bofh.it>
In reply to#1407627
The current patch to correct this problem is here:

https://lkml.org/lkml/2016/5/24/679

Since v7 of the ACPI/NUMA patches are likely going to be added to 
linux-next as soon as the current merge window ends, further 
simplifications of the informational prints should probably be rebased 
on top of it.

David Daney

On 05/26/2016 09:35 AM, Joe Perches wrote:
> On Thu, 2016-05-26 at 09:22 -0700, Ganapatrao Kulkarni wrote:
>> On Wed, May 25, 2016 at 7:43 PM, Zhen Lei <thunder.leizhen@huawei.com> wrote:
>>> numa_init(of_numa_init) may returned error because of numa configuration
>>> error. So "No NUMA configuration found" is inaccurate. In fact, specific
>>> configuration error information can be immediately printed by the
>>> testing branch. So "No NUMA..." only needs to be printed when numa_off.
> []
>>> diff --git a/arch/arm64/mm/numa.c b/arch/arm64/mm/numa.c
> []
>>> @@ -362,7 +362,8 @@ static int __init dummy_numa_init(void)
>>>          int ret;
>>>          struct memblock_region *mblk;
>>>
>>> -       pr_info("%s\n", "No NUMA configuration found");
>>> +       if (numa_off)
>> IIRC, it should be
>> if (!numa_off)
>> we want to print this message when we failed to find proper numa configuration.
>> when numa_off is set, we will not look for any numa configuration.
>>
>>>
>>> +               pr_info("%s\n", "No NUMA configuration found");
>
> trivia:
>
> Using printk("%s\n", "string") just makes the object code larger
> for no particular benefit.
>
> 	pr_info("No NUMA configuration found\n");
>
> would be smaller, faster and more intelligible for humans too.
>
> Maybe something like this:
> ---
>   arch/arm64/mm/numa.c | 41 ++++++++++++++++++++---------------------
>   1 file changed, 20 insertions(+), 21 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/arch/arm64/mm/numa.c b/arch/arm64/mm/numa.c
> index 98dc104..2042452 100644
> --- a/arch/arm64/mm/numa.c
> +++ b/arch/arm64/mm/numa.c
> @@ -17,6 +17,8 @@
>    * along with this program.  If not, see <http://www.gnu.org/licenses/>.
>    */
>
> +#define pr_fmt(fmt) "NUMA: " fmt
> +
>   #include <linux/bootmem.h>
>   #include <linux/memblock.h>
>   #include <linux/module.h>
> @@ -36,7 +38,7 @@ static __init int numa_parse_early_param(char *opt)
>   	if (!opt)
>   		return -EINVAL;
>   	if (!strncmp(opt, "off", 3)) {
> -		pr_info("%s\n", "NUMA turned off");
> +		pr_info("NUMA turned off\n");
>   		numa_off = 1;
>   	}
>   	return 0;
> @@ -107,7 +109,7 @@ static void __init setup_node_to_cpumask_map(void)
>   		set_cpu_numa_node(cpu, NUMA_NO_NODE);
>
>   	/* cpumask_of_node() will now work */
> -	pr_debug("NUMA: Node to cpumask map for %d nodes\n", nr_node_ids);
> +	pr_debug("Node to cpumask map for %d nodes\n", nr_node_ids);
>   }
>
>   /*
> @@ -142,14 +144,14 @@ int __init numa_add_memblk(int nid, u64 start, u64 size)
>
>   	ret = memblock_set_node(start, size, &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);
> +		pr_err("memblock [0x%llx - 0x%llx] failed to add on node %d\n",
> +		       start, (start + size - 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);
> +	pr_info("Adding memblock [0x%llx - 0x%llx] on node %d\n",
> +		start, (start + size - 1), nid);
>   	return ret;
>   }
>
> @@ -163,19 +165,18 @@ static void __init setup_node_data(int nid, u64 start_pfn, u64 end_pfn)
>   	void *nd;
>   	int tnid;
>
> -	pr_info("NUMA: Initmem setup node %d [mem %#010Lx-%#010Lx]\n",
> -			nid, start_pfn << PAGE_SHIFT,
> -			(end_pfn << PAGE_SHIFT) - 1);
> +	pr_info("Initmem setup node %d [mem %#010Lx-%#010Lx]\n",
> +		nid, start_pfn << PAGE_SHIFT, (end_pfn << PAGE_SHIFT) - 1);
>
>   	nd_pa = memblock_alloc_try_nid(nd_size, SMP_CACHE_BYTES, nid);
>   	nd = __va(nd_pa);
>
>   	/* report and initialize */
> -	pr_info("NUMA: NODE_DATA [mem %#010Lx-%#010Lx]\n",
> +	pr_info("NODE_DATA [mem %#010Lx-%#010Lx]\n",
>   		nd_pa, nd_pa + nd_size - 1);
>   	tnid = early_pfn_to_nid(nd_pa >> PAGE_SHIFT);
>   	if (tnid != nid)
> -		pr_info("NUMA: NODE_DATA(%d) on node %d\n", nid, tnid);
> +		pr_info("NODE_DATA(%d) on node %d\n", nid, tnid);
>
>   	node_data[nid] = nd;
>   	memset(NODE_DATA(nid), 0, sizeof(pg_data_t));
> @@ -232,8 +233,7 @@ static int __init numa_alloc_distance(void)
>   			numa_distance[i * numa_distance_cnt + j] = i == j ?
>   				LOCAL_DISTANCE : REMOTE_DISTANCE;
>
> -	pr_debug("NUMA: Initialized distance table, cnt=%d\n",
> -			numa_distance_cnt);
> +	pr_debug("Initialized distance table, cnt=%d\n", numa_distance_cnt);
>
>   	return 0;
>   }
> @@ -254,20 +254,20 @@ static int __init numa_alloc_distance(void)
>   void __init numa_set_distance(int from, int to, int distance)
>   {
>   	if (!numa_distance) {
> -		pr_warn_once("NUMA: Warning: distance table not allocated yet\n");
> +		pr_warn_once("Warning: distance table not allocated yet\n");
>   		return;
>   	}
>
>   	if (from >= numa_distance_cnt || to >= numa_distance_cnt ||
>   			from < 0 || to < 0) {
> -		pr_warn_once("NUMA: Warning: node ids are out of bound, from=%d to=%d distance=%d\n",
> -			    from, to, distance);
> +		pr_warn_once("Warning: node ids are out of bound, from=%d to=%d distance=%d\n",
> +			     from, to, distance);
>   		return;
>   	}
>
>   	if ((u8)distance != distance ||
>   	    (from == to && distance != LOCAL_DISTANCE)) {
> -		pr_warn_once("NUMA: Warning: invalid distance parameter, from=%d to=%d distance=%d\n",
> +		pr_warn_once("Warning: invalid distance parameter, from=%d to=%d distance=%d\n",
>   			     from, to, distance);
>   		return;
>   	}
> @@ -294,7 +294,7 @@ static int __init numa_register_nodes(void)
>   	/* Check that valid nid is set to memblks */
>   	for_each_memblock(memory, mblk)
>   		if (mblk->nid == NUMA_NO_NODE || mblk->nid >= MAX_NUMNODES) {
> -			pr_warn("NUMA: Warning: invalid memblk node %d [mem %#010Lx-%#010Lx]\n",
> +			pr_warn("Warning: invalid memblk node %d [mem %#010Lx-%#010Lx]\n",
>   				mblk->nid, mblk->base,
>   				mblk->base + mblk->size - 1);
>   			return -EINVAL;
> @@ -362,9 +362,8 @@ static int __init dummy_numa_init(void)
>   	int ret;
>   	struct memblock_region *mblk;
>
> -	pr_info("%s\n", "No NUMA configuration found");
> -	pr_info("NUMA: Faking a node at [mem %#018Lx-%#018Lx]\n",
> -	       0LLU, PFN_PHYS(max_pfn) - 1);
> +	pr_info("No NUMA configuration found - faking a node at [mem %#018Lx-%#018Lx]\n",
> +		0LLU, PFN_PHYS(max_pfn) - 1);
>
>   	for_each_memblock(memory, mblk) {
>   		ret = numa_add_memblk(0, mblk->base, mblk->size);
>
> _______________________________________________
> linux-arm-kernel mailing list
> linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
> http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel
>

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

#1407781

From"Leizhen (ThunderTown)" <thunder.leizhen@huawei.com>
Date2016-05-27 04:40 +0200
Message-ID<rDfQS-62A-3@gated-at.bofh.it>
In reply to#1407644

On 2016/5/27 1:12, David Daney wrote:
> The current patch to correct this problem is here:
> 
> https://lkml.org/lkml/2016/5/24/679
> 
> Since v7 of the ACPI/NUMA patches are likely going to be added to linux-next as soon as the current merge window ends, further simplifications of the informational prints should probably be rebased on top of it.
> 
> David Daney
> 

>> On Thu, 2016-05-26 at 09:22 -0700, Ganapatrao Kulkarni wrote:
>>> IIRC, it should be
>>> if (!numa_off)
>>> we want to print this message when we failed to find proper numa configuration.
>>> when numa_off is set, we will not look for any numa configuration.
>>>
>>>>
>>>> +               pr_info("%s\n", "No NUMA configuration found");
>>


OK, I think I also missed some cases.

But my problem still have not been resolved by "https://lkml.org/lkml/2016/5/24/679", see below. I will update my patches base on it.


[    0.000000] NUMA: Adding memblock [0x0 - 0x6affffff] on node 0
[    0.000000] NUMA: parsing numa-distance-map-v1
[    0.000000] NUMA: Warning: invalid memblk node 4 [mem 0x6b000000-0x7fbfffff]		//My numa configuration is incorrect, but not "No ... found"
[    0.000000] No NUMA configuration found						//Above warning is very detail, this can be removed
[    0.000000] NUMA: Faking a node at [mem 0x0000000000000000-0x00000017ffffffff]

[toc] | [prev] | [standalone]

Back to top | Article view | linux.kernel

csiph-web