-----Original Message----- > On 03/10/2021 09:17 AM, HAGIO KAZUHITO(萩尾 一仁) wrote: > > -----Original Message----- > >> Hi, Vincent > >> Thank you for your reply and suggestion. > >> > >> > >> On 02/10/2021 09:59 PM, Vincent Whitchurch wrote: > >> > >> > >> On Tue, Jan 26, 2021 at 12:13:31PM +0100, Youling Tang wrote: > >> > >> "__node_data" instead of "node_data" is used in the MIPS architecture, > >> so "__node_data" is used to replace "node_data" to improve the use of > >> next_online_pgdat() functions in the MIPS architecture. > >> > >> > >> On my 32-bit MIPS dumps, MEMORY: works properly without this patch, but > >> they have contig_page_data instead of __node_data/node_data so they > >> > >> When the node_data/__node_data and pgdat_list symbols cannot be successfully > >> read from the kernel symbols, the contig_page_data symbol will be read. In > >> your 32-bit machine, there should be no node_data/__node_data, pgdat_list > >> symbols, and a single node, so the memory size can be displayed normally > >> without this patch. > >> > >> > >> shouldn't be affected by this code. AFAICS only mach-loongson64 and > >> mach-ip27 have __node_data. > >> > >> > >> Yes, only mach-loongson64 and mach-ip27 use __node_data in the MIPS > >> architecture. > >> > >> > >> > >> E.g. Without this patch: > >> ... > >> MEMORY: 0 > >> ... > >> > >> > >> With this patch: > >> ... > >> MEMORY: 7.5 GB > >> ... > >> > >> Signed-off-by: Huacai Chen <chenhuacai@xxxxxxxxxxx> <mailto:chenhuacai@xxxxxxxxxxx> > >> Signed-off-by: Youling Tang <tangyouling@xxxxxxxxxxx> <mailto:tangyouling@xxxxxxxxxxx> > >> --- > >> memory.c | 28 ++++++++++++++++++---------- > >> 1 file changed, 18 insertions(+), 10 deletions(-) > >> > >> diff --git a/memory.c b/memory.c > >> index 33b0ca7..5347958 100644 > >> --- a/memory.c > >> +++ b/memory.c > >> @@ -17820,22 +17820,28 @@ next_online_pgdat(int node) > >> char buf[BUFSIZE]; > >> ulong pgdat; > >> > >> +#ifndef __mips__ > >> +#define NODE_DATA_VAR "node_data" > >> +#else > >> +#define NODE_DATA_VAR "__node_data" > >> +#endif > >> > >> > >> Is this really correct? Doesn't __mips__ check the host architecture > >> when what we want to check here is the target? > >> > >> The results of filtering in the kernel code are as follows : > >> # grep -wnr "EXPORT_SYMBOL(node_data)" > >> arch/alpha/mm/numa.c:23:EXPORT_SYMBOL(node_data); > >> arch/arc/mm/init.c:37:EXPORT_SYMBOL(node_data); > >> arch/sparc/mm/init_64.c:1106:EXPORT_SYMBOL(node_data); > >> arch/powerpc/mm/numa.c:52:EXPORT_SYMBOL(node_data); > >> arch/s390/kernel/numa.c:18:EXPORT_SYMBOL(node_data); > >> arch/arm64/mm/numa.c:20:EXPORT_SYMBOL(node_data); > >> arch/x86/mm/numa.c:26:EXPORT_SYMBOL(node_data); > >> > >> # grep -wnr "EXPORT_SYMBOL(__node_data)" > >> arch/mips/sgi-ip27/ip27-memory.c:38:EXPORT_SYMBOL(__node_data); > >> arch/mips/loongson64/numa.c:33:EXPORT_SYMBOL(__node_data); > >> > >> > >> In the MIPS architecture, no platform uses node_data, only the __node_data > >> symbol. All other architectures use node_data symbols, so it should be > >> feasible to use __mips__ to determine the target (as long as it is a MIPS > >> architecture, use __node_data instead of node_data). > > OK. Could you add a code comment about this to avoid confusion? > Ok. I will add the following comment, you see if it is feasible. The sgi-ip27 is mips32, isn't it? then please add "the mips32 and mips64 architecutres". Thanks, Kazu > > --- a/memory.c > +++ b/memory.c > @@ -17821,7 +17821,10 @@ next_online_pgdat(int node) > { > char buf[BUFSIZE]; > ulong pgdat; > > +/* > + * "__node_data" is used in the mips architecture, > + * and "node_data" is used in other architectures. > + */ > #ifndef __mips__ > #define NODE_DATA_VAR "node_data" > #else > > Thanks, > Youling > > > > Thanks, > > Kazu -- Crash-utility mailing list Crash-utility@xxxxxxxxxx https://listman.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/crash-utility
