On 9/25/25 3:04 PM, Mike Rapoport wrote:

On Thu, Sep 25, 2025 at 10:54:07AM +0200, David Hildenbrand wrote:

quoted

On 24.09.25 20:40, Donet Tom wrote:

quoted

register_one_node() and register_node() are small functions.
This patch merges them into a single function named register_node()
to improve code readability.

No functional changes are introduced.

Signed-off-by: Donet Tom <redacted>
---

[...]

quoted

   /**
    * unregister_node - unregister a node device
    * @node: node going away

@@ -869,7 +842,13 @@ void register_memory_blocks_under_node_hotplug(int nid, unsigned long start_pfn,
   }
   #endif /* CONFIG_MEMORY_HOTPLUG */
-int register_one_node(int nid)
+/*

We can directly convert this to proper kernel doc by using /**

quoted

+ * register_node - Setup a sysfs device for a node.
+ * @nid - Node number to use when creating the device.
+ *
+ * Initialize and register the node device.

and briefly describing what the return value means

"Returns 0 on success, ..."

For kernel-doc it should be

Return: 0 on success, ...

Sure I will change it.

quoted

quoted

+ */
+int register_node(int nid)
   {
   	int error;
   	int cpu;

@@ -880,14 +859,23 @@ int register_one_node(int nid)
   		return -ENOMEM;
   	INIT_LIST_HEAD(&node->access_list);
-	node_devices[nid] = node;
-	error = register_node(node_devices[nid], nid);
+	node->dev.id = nid;
+	node->dev.bus = &node_subsys;
+	node->dev.release = node_device_release;
+	node->dev.groups = node_dev_groups;
+
+	error = device_register(&node->dev);
   	if (error) {
-		node_devices[nid] = NULL;

Wondering why we did have this temporary setting of the node_devices[] in
there. But I cannot immediately spot why it was required.

register_cpu_under_node() references node_devices, so that assignment can
be moved just before the loop that adds CPUs to node.

Sure.

Thank you

quoted

-- 
Cheers

David / dhildenb