Re: [PATCH v12 4/5] arm64, numa: Add NUMA support for arm64 platforms.

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



On 29.02.16 15:42:58, David Daney wrote:
> On 02/29/2016 09:34 AM, Robert Richter wrote:
> >On 22.02.16 17:58:22, David Daney wrote:
> >>From: Ganapatrao Kulkarni <gkulkarni@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>

> >>+static int __init numa_init(int (*init_func)(void))
> >>+{
> >>+	int ret;
> >>+
> >>+	nodes_clear(numa_nodes_parsed);
> >>+	nodes_clear(node_possible_map);
> >>+	nodes_clear(node_online_map);
> >>+	numa_free_distance();
> 
>         ^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>      Cleanup for any previous numa_alloc_distance()
> 
> >>+
> >>+	ret = numa_alloc_distance();
> >>+	if (ret < 0)
> >>+		return ret;
> >
> >If you move this before the remaining initializers, you will need to
> >clean this up on error.
> 
> Yes, we do this.  See above.
> 
> >So better move it back after
> >numa_register_nodes() as it was in v10. This should work since
> >distances are used not earlier than numa is enabled.
> 
> I moved it here for a reason.
> 
> The init_func (of_numa_init() in this case) makes callbacks that use the
> numa_distance object.  We need to allocate it before using it. Allocating it
> after calling the init_func() is too late.

Sounds reasonable and looks sane now.

Thanks,

-Robert
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-efi" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html



[Index of Archives]     [Linux ARM Kernel]     [Linux ARM]     [Linux Omap]     [Fedora ARM]     [IETF Annouce]     [Security]     [Bugtraq]     [Linux OMAP]     [Linux MIPS]     [ECOS]     [Asterisk Internet PBX]     [Linux API]

  Powered by Linux