On 01.08.24 08:08, Mike Rapoport wrote:
From: "Mike Rapoport (Microsoft)" <rppt@xxxxxxxxxx>
Instead of looping over numa_meminfo array to detect node's start and
end addresses use get_pfn_range_for_init().
This is shorter and make it easier to lift numa_memblks to generic code.
Signed-off-by: Mike Rapoport (Microsoft) <rppt@xxxxxxxxxx>
Tested-by: Zi Yan <ziy@xxxxxxxxxx> # for x86_64 and arm64
---
arch/x86/mm/numa.c | 13 +++----------
1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 10 deletions(-)
diff --git a/arch/x86/mm/numa.c b/arch/x86/mm/numa.c
index edfc38803779..cfe7e5477cf8 100644
--- a/arch/x86/mm/numa.c
+++ b/arch/x86/mm/numa.c
@@ -521,17 +521,10 @@ static int __init numa_register_memblks(struct numa_meminfo *mi)
/* Finally register nodes. */
for_each_node_mask(nid, node_possible_map) {
- u64 start = PFN_PHYS(max_pfn);
- u64 end = 0;
+ unsigned long start_pfn, end_pfn;
- for (i = 0; i < mi->nr_blks; i++) {
- if (nid != mi->blk[i].nid)
- continue;
- start = min(mi->blk[i].start, start);
- end = max(mi->blk[i].end, end);
- }
-
- if (start >= end)
+ get_pfn_range_for_nid(nid, &start_pfn, &end_pfn);
+ if (start_pfn >= end_pfn)
continue;
alloc_node_data(nid);
Acked-by: David Hildenbrand <david@xxxxxxxxxx>
--
Cheers,
David / dhildenb
