Re: [PATCH v4 24/26] arch_numa: switch over to numa_memblks
Mike Rapoport <[email protected]>
| Newsgroups | gmane.linux.ports.ppc.embedded,gmane.linux.kernel,gmane.linux.drivers.devicetree,gmane.linux.acpi.devel,gmane.linux.kernel.cross-arch,gmane.linux.ports.arm.kernel,gmane.linux.documentation,gmane.linux.ports.mips,gmane.linux.kernel.mm,gmane.linux.ports.riscv,gmane.linux.ports.sh.devel,gmane.linux.ports.sparc |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <[email protected]> |
Hi, On Mon, Aug 26, 2024 at 06:17:22PM +0000, Bruno Faccini wrote: > > On 7 Aug 2024, at 2:41, Mike Rapoport wrote: > > > > From: "Mike Rapoport (Microsoft)" <[email protected]> > > > > Until now arch_numa was directly translating firmware NUMA information > > to memblock. > > > > Using numa_memblks as an intermediate step has a few advantages: > > * alignment with more battle tested x86 implementation > > * availability of NUMA emulation > > * maintaining node information for not yet populated memory > > > > Adjust a few places in numa_memblks to compile with 32-bit phys_addr_t > > and replace current functionality related to numa_add_memblk() and > > __node_distance() in arch_numa with the implementation based on > > numa_memblks and add functions required by numa_emulation. > > > > Signed-off-by: Mike Rapoport (Microsoft) <[email protected]> > > Tested-by: Zi Yan <[email protected]> # for x86_64 and arm64 > > Reviewed-by: Jonathan Cameron <[email protected]> > > Tested-by: Jonathan Cameron <[email protected]> [arm64 + CXL via > > QEMU] > > Acked-by: Dan Williams <[email protected]> > > Acked-by: David Hildenbrand <[email protected]> > > --- > > drivers/base/Kconfig | 1 + > > drivers/base/arch_numa.c | 201 +++++++++++-------------------------- > > include/asm-generic/numa.h | 6 +- > > mm/numa_memblks.c | 17 ++-- > > 4 files changed, 75 insertions(+), 150 deletions(-) > > > > <snip> > > > > + > > +u64 __init numa_emu_dma_end(void) > > +{ > > + return PFN_PHYS(memblock_start_of_DRAM() + SZ_4G); > > +} > > + > > PFN_PHYS() translation is unnecessary here, as > memblock_start_of_DRAM() + SZ_4G is already a > memory size. > > This should fix it: > > diff --git a/drivers/base/arch_numa.c b/drivers/base/arch_numa.c > index 8d49893c0e94..e18701676426 100644 > --- a/drivers/base/arch_numa.c > +++ b/drivers/base/arch_numa.c > @@ -346,7 +346,7 @@ void __init numa_emu_update_cpu_to_node(int > *emu_nid_to_phys, > > u64 __init numa_emu_dma_end(void) > { > - return PFN_PHYS(memblock_start_of_DRAM() + SZ_4G); > + return memblock_start_of_DRAM() + SZ_4G; > } > > void debug_cpumask_set_cpu(unsigned int cpu, int node, bool enable) Right, I've missed that. Thanks for the fix! Andrew, can you please apply this (with fixed formatting) diff --git a/drivers/base/arch_numa.c b/drivers/base/arch_numa.c index 8d49893c0e94..e18701676426 100644 --- a/drivers/base/arch_numa.c +++ b/drivers/base/arch_numa.c @@ -346,7 +346,7 @@ void __init numa_emu_update_cpu_to_node(int *emu_nid_to_phys, u64 __init numa_emu_dma_end(void) { - return PFN_PHYS(memblock_start_of_DRAM() + SZ_4G); + return memblock_start_of_DRAM() + SZ_4G; } void debug_cpumask_set_cpu(unsigned int cpu, int node, bool enable) -- Sincerely yours, Mike.