On 07/02/2018 12:54 PM, Pavel Tatashin wrote:
>
>
> On 07/02/2018 03:47 PM, Dave Hansen wrote:
>> On 07/01/2018 07:04 PM, Pavel Tatashin wrote:
>>> + for_each_present_section_nr(pnum_begin + 1, pnum_end) {
>>> + int nid = sparse_early_nid(__nr_to_section(pnum_end));
>>>
>>> + if (nid == nid_begin) {
>>> + map_count++;
>>> continue;
>>> }
>>
>>> + sparse_init_nid(nid_begin, pnum_begin, pnum_end, map_count);
>>> + nid_begin = nid;
>>> + pnum_begin = pnum_end;
>>> + map_count = 1;
>>> }
>>
>> Ugh, this is really hard to read. Especially because the pnum "counter"
>> is called "pnum_end".
>
> I called it pnum_end, because that is what is passed to
> sparse_init_nid(), but I see your point, and I can rename pnum_end to
> simply pnum if that will make things look better.
Could you just make it a helper that takes a beginning pnum and returns
the number of consecutive sections?
>> So, this is basically a loop that collects all of the adjacent sections
>> in a given single nid and then calls sparse_init_nid(). pnum_end in
>> this case is non-inclusive, so the sparse_init_nid() call is actually
>> for the *previous* nid that pnum_end is pointing _past_.
>>
>> This *really* needs commenting.
>
> There is a comment before sparse_init_nid() about inclusiveness:
>
> 434 /*
> 435 * Initialize sparse on a specific node. The node spans [pnum_begin, pnum_end)
> 436 * And number of present sections in this node is map_count.
> 437 */
> 438 static void __init sparse_init_nid(int nid, unsigned long pnum_begin,
> 439 unsigned long pnum_end,
> 440 unsigned long map_count)
Which I totally missed. Could you comment the code, please?
