On Mon, Jul 13, 2020 at 12:04 AM Mike Rapoport <rppt@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > Hi Dan, > > On Sun, Jul 12, 2020 at 09:26:48AM -0700, Dan Williams wrote: > > Similar to how generic memory_add_physaddr_to_nid() interrogates > > memblock data for numa information, introduce > > get_reserved_pfn_range_from_nid() to enable the same operation for > > reserved memory ranges. Example memory ranges that are reserved, but > > still have associated numa-info are persistent memory or Soft Reserved > > (EFI_MEMORY_SP) memory. > > Here again, I would prefer to add a weak default for > phys_to_target_node() because the "generic" implementation is not really > generic. > > The fallback to reserved ranges is x86 specfic because on x86 most of the > reserved areas is not in memblock.memory. AFAIK, no other architecture > does this. True, I was pre-fetching ARM using the new EFI "Special Purpose" memory attribute. However, until that becomes something that platforms deploy in practice I'm ok with not solving that problem for now. > And x86 anyway has implementation of phys_to_target_node(). Sure, let's go with the default stub for non-x86. Justin, do you think it would make sense to fold your dax_kmem enabling for arm64 series into my enabling of dax_hmem for all memory-hotplug archs?
