On Sat, Aug 27, 2016 at 06:44:39PM +0800, Leizhen (ThunderTown) wrote:

On 2016/8/26 23:35, Will Deacon wrote:

quoted

On Wed, Aug 24, 2016 at 03:44:53PM +0800, Zhen Lei wrote:

quoted

Update documentation. This limit is unneccessary.

Signed-off-by: Zhen Lei <redacted>
Acked-by: Rob Herring <robh@kernel.org>
---
 Documentation/devicetree/bindings/numa.txt | 1 -
 1 file changed, 1 deletion(-)

diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/numa.txt b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/numa.txt
index 21b3505..c0ea4a7 100644
--- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/numa.txt
+++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/numa.txt

@@ -48,7 +48,6 @@ distance (memory latency) between all numa nodes.

   Note:
 	1. Each entry represents distance from first node to second node.
-	The distances are equal in either direction.

Hmm, so what happens now if firmware provides a description where both
distances (in either direction) are supplied, but are different?

I have not known any hardware that the distances of two direction are
different yet

Then let's not add support for this just yet. When we have systems that
actually need it, we'll be in a much better position to assess the
suitability of any patches. At the moment, the whole thing is pretty
questionable and it adds needless complication to the code.

Will