On 2016/8/10 10:12, Hanjun Guo wrote:
> On 2016/8/8 17:18, Zhen Lei wrote:
>> Use the same tactic to cpu and numa-distance nodes.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Zhen Lei <thunder.leizhen@xxxxxxxxxx>
>> ---
>> arch/arm64/mm/numa.c | 5 +++++
>> 1 file changed, 5 insertions(+)
>>
>> diff --git a/arch/arm64/mm/numa.c b/arch/arm64/mm/numa.c
>> index c7fe3ec..2601660 100644
>> --- a/arch/arm64/mm/numa.c
>> +++ b/arch/arm64/mm/numa.c
>> @@ -141,6 +141,11 @@ int __init numa_add_memblk(int nid, u64 start, u64 end)
>> {
>> int ret;
>>
>> + if (nid >= MAX_NUMNODES) {
>> + pr_warn("NUMA: Node id %u exceeds maximum value\n", nid);
>> + return -EINVAL;
>> + }
>
> I think this check should be added to of_numa_parse_memory_nodes(), which before
> the numa_add_memblk() called, it's the same logic in of_numa_parse_cpu_nodes() and
> the node id is checked before calling numa_add_memblk() in ACPI.
Yes, you are right. This check is arch independent.
>
> Thanks
> Hanjun
>
>
>
> .
>
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe devicetree" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
