From: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
To: Gary Hade <garyhade@us.ibm.com>
Cc: Roel Kluin <roel.kluin@gmail.com>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>,
lkml <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
linux-mm@kvack.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] mm: get_nid_for_pfn() returns int
Date: Mon, 26 Jan 2009 22:33:50 -0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20090126223350.610b0283.akpm@linux-foundation.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20090119175919.GA7476@us.ibm.com>
On Mon, 19 Jan 2009 09:59:19 -0800 Gary Hade <garyhade@us.ibm.com> wrote:
> On Sun, Jan 18, 2009 at 11:36:28PM +0100, Roel Kluin wrote:
> > get_nid_for_pfn() returns int
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Roel Kluin <roel.kluin@gmail.com>
> > ---
> > vi drivers/base/node.c +256
> > static int get_nid_for_pfn(unsigned long pfn)
> >
> > diff --git a/drivers/base/node.c b/drivers/base/node.c
> > index 43fa90b..f8f578a 100644
> > --- a/drivers/base/node.c
> > +++ b/drivers/base/node.c
> > @@ -303,7 +303,7 @@ int unregister_mem_sect_under_nodes(struct memory_block *mem_blk)
> > sect_start_pfn = section_nr_to_pfn(mem_blk->phys_index);
> > sect_end_pfn = sect_start_pfn + PAGES_PER_SECTION - 1;
> > for (pfn = sect_start_pfn; pfn <= sect_end_pfn; pfn++) {
> > - unsigned int nid;
> > + int nid;
> >
> > nid = get_nid_for_pfn(pfn);
> > if (nid < 0)
>
> My mistake. Good catch.
>
Presumably the (nid < 0) case has never happened.
Should we retain the test?
Is silently skipping the node in that case desirable behaviour?
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
To: Gary Hade <garyhade@us.ibm.com>
Cc: Roel Kluin <roel.kluin@gmail.com>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>,
lkml <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
linux-mm@kvack.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] mm: get_nid_for_pfn() returns int
Date: Mon, 26 Jan 2009 22:33:50 -0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20090126223350.610b0283.akpm@linux-foundation.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20090119175919.GA7476@us.ibm.com>
On Mon, 19 Jan 2009 09:59:19 -0800 Gary Hade <garyhade@us.ibm.com> wrote:
> On Sun, Jan 18, 2009 at 11:36:28PM +0100, Roel Kluin wrote:
> > get_nid_for_pfn() returns int
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Roel Kluin <roel.kluin@gmail.com>
> > ---
> > vi drivers/base/node.c +256
> > static int get_nid_for_pfn(unsigned long pfn)
> >
> > diff --git a/drivers/base/node.c b/drivers/base/node.c
> > index 43fa90b..f8f578a 100644
> > --- a/drivers/base/node.c
> > +++ b/drivers/base/node.c
> > @@ -303,7 +303,7 @@ int unregister_mem_sect_under_nodes(struct memory_block *mem_blk)
> > sect_start_pfn = section_nr_to_pfn(mem_blk->phys_index);
> > sect_end_pfn = sect_start_pfn + PAGES_PER_SECTION - 1;
> > for (pfn = sect_start_pfn; pfn <= sect_end_pfn; pfn++) {
> > - unsigned int nid;
> > + int nid;
> >
> > nid = get_nid_for_pfn(pfn);
> > if (nid < 0)
>
> My mistake. Good catch.
>
Presumably the (nid < 0) case has never happened.
Should we retain the test?
Is silently skipping the node in that case desirable behaviour?
--
To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in
the body to majordomo@kvack.org. For more info on Linux MM,
see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ .
Don't email: <a href=mailto:"dont@kvack.org"> email@kvack.org </a>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2009-01-27 6:35 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 26+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2009-01-18 22:36 [PATCH] mm: get_nid_for_pfn() returns int Roel Kluin
2009-01-18 22:36 ` Roel Kluin
2009-01-19 17:59 ` Gary Hade
2009-01-19 17:59 ` Gary Hade
2009-01-27 6:33 ` Andrew Morton [this message]
2009-01-27 6:33 ` Andrew Morton
2009-01-27 21:07 ` Gary Hade
2009-01-27 21:07 ` Gary Hade
2009-01-28 5:04 ` Yasunori Goto
2009-01-28 5:04 ` Yasunori Goto
2009-02-27 14:56 ` roel kluin
2009-02-27 14:56 ` roel kluin
2009-02-27 21:33 ` Gary Hade
2009-02-27 21:33 ` Gary Hade
2009-02-27 21:46 ` Andrew Morton
2009-02-27 21:46 ` Andrew Morton
2009-02-28 0:14 ` Gary Hade
2009-02-28 0:14 ` Gary Hade
2009-02-28 0:22 ` Andrew Morton
2009-02-28 0:22 ` Andrew Morton
2009-02-28 3:02 ` Gary Hade
2009-02-28 3:02 ` Gary Hade
2009-02-28 4:08 ` Andrew Morton
2009-02-28 4:08 ` Andrew Morton
2009-03-01 20:58 ` Gary Hade
2009-03-01 20:58 ` Gary Hade
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20090126223350.610b0283.akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--to=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=garyhade@us.ibm.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
--cc=mingo@elte.hu \
--cc=roel.kluin@gmail.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.