On 2016/5/31 19:27, Leizhen (ThunderTown) wrote:

On 2016/5/31 17:07, Matthias Brugger wrote:

quoted

On 28/05/16 11:22, Zhen Lei wrote:

quoted

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 should be immediately printed by the
testing branch.

Signed-off-by: Zhen Lei <redacted>
---

Which kernel version is this patch based on?

Base on mainline(git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux.git), I git pulled about 3-5 days ago, the last commit-id is dc03c0f.

And thess patches base on https://lkml.org/lkml/2016/5/24/679 series(acpi numa) as David Daney's requirement.

quoted

Regards,
Matthias

quoted

  arch/arm64/mm/numa.c | 6 +++---
  drivers/of/of_numa.c | 7 +++----
  2 files changed, 6 insertions(+), 7 deletions(-)

diff --git a/arch/arm64/mm/numa.c b/arch/arm64/mm/numa.c
index 2601660..1b9622c 100644
--- a/arch/arm64/mm/numa.c
+++ b/arch/arm64/mm/numa.c

@@ -338,8 +338,10 @@ static int __init numa_init(int (*init_func)(void))
      if (ret < 0)
          return ret;

-    if (nodes_empty(numa_nodes_parsed))
+    if (nodes_empty(numa_nodes_parsed)) {
+        pr_info("No NUMA configuration found\n");
          return -EINVAL;
+    }

      ret = numa_register_nodes();
      if (ret < 0)

@@ -370,8 +372,6 @@ static int __init dummy_numa_init(void)

      if (numa_off)
          pr_info("NUMA disabled\n"); /* Forced off on command line. */
-    else
-        pr_info("No NUMA configuration found\n");
      pr_info("NUMA: Faking a node at [mem %#018Lx-%#018Lx]\n",
             0LLU, PFN_PHYS(max_pfn) - 1);

diff --git a/drivers/of/of_numa.c b/drivers/of/of_numa.c
index fb62307..3157130 100644
--- a/drivers/of/of_numa.c
+++ b/drivers/of/of_numa.c

@@ -63,7 +63,7 @@ static int __init of_numa_parse_memory_nodes(void)
      struct device_node *np = NULL;
      struct resource rsrc;
      u32 nid;
-    int i, r = 0;
+    int i, r;

      for_each_node_by_type(np, "memory") {
          r = of_property_read_u32(np, "numa-node-id", &nid);

@@ -81,12 +81,11 @@ static int __init of_numa_parse_memory_nodes(void)
          if (!i || r) {
              of_node_put(np);
              pr_err("NUMA: bad property in memory node\n");
-            r = r ? : -EINVAL;
-            break;
+            return r ? : -EINVAL;
          }
      }

-    return r;
+    return 0;
  }

Well this is fixing changes you introduced in this patch-set. Any reason this is not part of patch 2?

Because they fixed two different problems.

Hi, Matthias

I thougth it again on my way home yesterday. Yeah, you're right, move this part to patch 2, will make these two
patches looks more well. I put it here before, because for "No numa configuration" case, it originally returns error
code, so that it can not walk to "if (nodes_empty(numa_nodes_parsed))".

	ret = init_func();
	if (ret < 0)
		return ret;

   -    if (nodes_empty(numa_nodes_parsed))
   +    if (nodes_empty(numa_nodes_parsed)) {
   +        pr_info("No NUMA configuration found\n");
       		return -EINVAL;
   +    }

Regards,
Zhen Lei

quoted

quoted

  static int __init of_numa_parse_distance_map_v1(struct device_node *map)
-- 
2.5.0



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

.