On Friday 13 December 2013 04:37 PM, Tejun Heo wrote:
> On Mon, Dec 09, 2013 at 04:50:41PM -0500, Santosh Shilimkar wrote:
>> Introduce memblock memory allocation APIs which allow to support
>> PAE or LPAE extension on 32 bits archs where the physical memory
>> start address can be beyond 4GB. In such cases, existing bootmem
>> APIs which operate on 32 bit addresses won't work and needs
>> memblock layer which operates on 64 bit addresses.
>
> The overall API looks good to me. Thanks for doing this!
>
>> +static void * __init memblock_virt_alloc_internal(
>> + phys_addr_t size, phys_addr_t align,
>> + phys_addr_t min_addr, phys_addr_t max_addr,
>> + int nid)
>> +{
>> + phys_addr_t alloc;
>> + void *ptr;
>> +
>> + if (nid == MAX_NUMNODES)
>> + pr_warn("%s: usage of MAX_NUMNODES is depricated. Use NUMA_NO_NODE\n",
>> + __func__);
>
> Why not use WARN_ONCE()? Also, shouldn't nid be set to NUMA_NO_NODE
> here?
>
You want all the users using MAX_NUMNODES to know about it so that
the wrong usage can be fixed. WARN_ONCE will hide that.
> ...
>> + if (nid != NUMA_NO_NODE) {
>
> Otherwise, the above test is broken.
>
So the idea was just to warn the users and allow them to fix
the code. Well we are just allowing the existing users of using
either MAX_NUMNODES or NUMA_NO_NODE continue to work. Thats what
we discussed, right ?
--
To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in
the body to majordomo@xxxxxxxxx. For more info on Linux MM,
see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ .
Don't email: <a href=mailto:"dont@xxxxxxxxx";> email@xxxxxxxxx </a>