Re: [PATCH v2 7/9] sparc64: numa: check the node id consistently for sparc64

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

To: linyunsheng@xxxxxxxxxx
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 7/9] sparc64: numa: check the node id consistently for sparc64
From: David Miller <davem@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Sat, 31 Aug 2019 13:02:50 -0700 (PDT)
Cc: catalin.marinas@xxxxxxx, will@xxxxxxxxxx, mingo@xxxxxxxxxx, bp@xxxxxxxxx, rth@xxxxxxxxxxx, ink@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, mattst88@xxxxxxxxx, benh@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, paulus@xxxxxxxxx, mpe@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx, heiko.carstens@xxxxxxxxxx, gor@xxxxxxxxxxxxx, borntraeger@xxxxxxxxxx, ysato@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, dalias@xxxxxxxx, ralf@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx, paul.burton@xxxxxxxx, jhogan@xxxxxxxxxx, jiaxun.yang@xxxxxxxxxxx, chenhc@xxxxxxxxxx, akpm@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, rppt@xxxxxxxxxxxxx, anshuman.khandual@xxxxxxx, tglx@xxxxxxxxxxxxx, cai@xxxxxx, robin.murphy@xxxxxxx, linux-arm-kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, linux-kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, hpa@xxxxxxxxx, x86@xxxxxxxxxx, dave.hansen@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, luto@xxxxxxxxxx, peterz@xxxxxxxxxxxxx, len.brown@xxxxxxxxx, axboe@xxxxxxxxx, dledford@xxxxxxxxxx, jeffrey.t.kirsher@xxxxxxxxx, linux-alpha@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, nfont@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, naveen.n.rao@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, mwb@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, linuxppc-dev@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, linux-s390@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, linux-sh@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, sparclinux@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, tbogendoerfer@xxxxxxx, linux-mips@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, linuxarm@xxxxxxxxxx
In-reply-to: <0195eb73-99ae-fec2-3e11-2cb9e6677926@huawei.com>
References: <1567231103-13237-8-git-send-email-linyunsheng@huawei.com> <20190830.235337.570776316111294728.davem@davemloft.net> <0195eb73-99ae-fec2-3e11-2cb9e6677926@huawei.com>

From: Yunsheng Lin <linyunsheng@xxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Sat, 31 Aug 2019 16:57:04 +0800

> Did you mean sparc64 system does not has ACPI, the device's node id will
> not specified by ACPI, so the ACPI is unrelated here?

Yes, sparc64 never has and never will have ACPI.

This is also true for several other platforms where you have made this
change.

The assumption of your entire patch set is that the semantics of the
NUMA node ID are somehow completely defined by ACPI semantics.  Which
is not true.

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

Follow-Ups:
- Re: [PATCH v2 7/9] sparc64: numa: check the node id consistently for sparc64
  - From: Yunsheng Lin

References:
- [PATCH v2 7/9] sparc64: numa: check the node id consistently for sparc64
  - From: Yunsheng Lin
- Re: [PATCH v2 7/9] sparc64: numa: check the node id consistently for sparc64
  - From: David Miller
- Re: [PATCH v2 7/9] sparc64: numa: check the node id consistently for sparc64
  - From: Yunsheng Lin

Prev by Date: Re: [PATCH 19/26] arm64: remove __iounmap
Next by Date: Re: [PATCH 24/26] riscv: use the generic ioremap code
Previous by thread: Re: [PATCH v2 7/9] sparc64: numa: check the node id consistently for sparc64
Next by thread: Re: [PATCH v2 7/9] sparc64: numa: check the node id consistently for sparc64
Index(es):
- Date
- Thread

[Index of Archives] [Kernel Development] [Kernel Newbies] [IDE] [Security] [Git] [Netfilter] [Bugtraq] [Yosemite Info] [MIPS Linux] [ARM Linux] [Linux Security] [Linux RAID] [Linux ATA RAID] [Samba] [Linux Media] [Device Mapper]