On 11/7/23 20:30, Russell King (Oracle) wrote:
Since "drivers: base: Move cpu_dev_init() after node_dev_init()", we can remove some redundant code. node_dev_init() will walk through the nodes calling register_one_node() on each. This will trickle down to __register_one_node() which walks all present CPUs, calling register_cpu_under_node() on each. register_cpu_under_node() will call get_cpu_device(cpu) for each, which will return NULL until the CPU is registered using register_cpu(). This now happens _after_ node_dev_init(). Therefore, calling register_cpu_under_node() from __register_one_node() becomes a no-op, and can be removed. Signed-off-by: Russell King (Oracle) <rmk+kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> --- drivers/base/node.c | 7 ------- 1 file changed, 7 deletions(-)
__register_one_node() can be called in memory hot add path either. In that path, a new NUMA node can be presented and becomes online. Does this become a problem after the logic of associating CPU with newly added NUMA node? Thanks, Gavin
diff --git a/drivers/base/node.c b/drivers/base/node.c index 493d533f8375..4d5ac7cf8757 100644 --- a/drivers/base/node.c +++ b/drivers/base/node.c @@ -867,7 +867,6 @@ void register_memory_blocks_under_node(int nid, unsigned long start_pfn, int __register_one_node(int nid) { int error; - int cpu;node_devices[nid] = kzalloc(sizeof(struct node), GFP_KERNEL);if (!node_devices[nid]) @@ -875,12 +874,6 @@ int __register_one_node(int nid)error = register_node(node_devices[nid], nid); - /* link cpu under this node */- for_each_present_cpu(cpu) { - if (cpu_to_node(cpu) == nid) - register_cpu_under_node(cpu, nid); - } - INIT_LIST_HEAD(&node_devices[nid]->access_list); node_init_caches(nid);
|