On 2015/8/24 21:25, Rob Herring wrote: > +benh > > On Mon, Aug 24, 2015 at 7:30 AM, Zhen Lei <thunder.leizhen@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: >> If use of_platform_populate to scan dt-nodes and add devices, the >> subnode of root(such as /smmu), when being scanned and invoke > > You should have a bus as the sub-node of root rather than devices > directly off of root. You still have a problem though... But actually the parent of bus is also &platform_bus if we didn't have special initialization. For example: The function of_platform_device_create_pdata invoke of_device_alloc first, then invoke of_device_add. But in of_device_alloc, we can find that: dev->dev.parent = parent ? : &platform_bus; > >> of_device_add, the ofdev->dev.parent is always equal &platform_bus. So >> that, function set_dev_node will not be called. And in device_add, >> dev_to_node(parent) always return NUMA_NO_NODE. >> >> Signed-off-by: Zhen Lei <thunder.leizhen@xxxxxxxxxx> >> --- >> drivers/base/core.c | 2 +- >> drivers/of/device.c | 2 +- >> 2 files changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) >> >> diff --git a/drivers/base/core.c b/drivers/base/core.c >> index dafae6d..5df4f46b 100644 >> --- a/drivers/base/core.c >> +++ b/drivers/base/core.c >> @@ -1017,7 +1017,7 @@ int device_add(struct device *dev) >> dev->kobj.parent = kobj; >> >> /* use parent numa_node */ >> - if (parent) >> + if (parent && (parent != &platform_bus)) > > This is only fixing one specific case, but I think things are broken > for any case where the NUMA associativity if not set at the top level > bus node. I think this should be something like: > > if (parent && (dev_to_node(dev) != NO_NUMA_NODE)) It seems a mistake, we should use equal sign. if (parent && (dev_to_node(dev) == NUMA_NO_NODE)) > > Then the OF code can set the node however it wants. OK. I will send patch v2 base upon your advice. Thank you. > >> set_dev_node(dev, dev_to_node(parent)); >> >> /* first, register with generic layer. */ >> diff --git a/drivers/of/device.c b/drivers/of/device.c >> index 8b91ea2..96ebece 100644 >> --- a/drivers/of/device.c >> +++ b/drivers/of/device.c >> @@ -63,7 +63,7 @@ int of_device_add(struct platform_device *ofdev) >> /* device_add will assume that this device is on the same node as >> * the parent. If there is no parent defined, set the node >> * explicitly */ >> - if (!ofdev->dev.parent) >> + if (!ofdev->dev.parent || (ofdev->dev.parent == &platform_bus)) > > And then remove the if here. > OK. I also think remove this statement will be better. Althouth set_dev_node maybe called two times, but it only spends very little time, and this almost happened at initialization phase. >> set_dev_node(&ofdev->dev, of_node_to_nid(ofdev->dev.of_node)); >> >> return device_add(&ofdev->dev); >> -- >> 2.5.0 >> >> >> -- >> 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 > > . > -- 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
