From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: guohanjun@huawei.com (Hanjun Guo)
Date: Thu, 20 Oct 2016 20:21:37 +0800
Subject: [PATCH 2/2] arm64/numa: fix incorrect print of end_pfn
In-Reply-To: <20161020105130.GD24914@arm.com>
References: <1476935576-59941-1-git-send-email-guohanjun@huawei.com>
 <1476935576-59941-2-git-send-email-guohanjun@huawei.com>
 <20161020105130.GD24914@arm.com>
Message-ID: <5808B6D1.809@huawei.com>
To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
List-Id: linux-arm-kernel.lists.infradead.org

On 2016/10/20 18:51, Will Deacon wrote:
> On Thu, Oct 20, 2016 at 11:52:56AM +0800, Hanjun Guo wrote:
>> From: Hanjun Guo <hanjun.guo@linaro.org>
>>
>> When booting on NUMA system with memory-less node (no
>> memory dimm on this memory controller), the print
>> for setup_node_data() is incorrect:
>>
>> NUMA: Initmem setup node 2 [mem 0x00000000-0xffffffffffffffff]
>>
>> It should be 0, not 0xffffffffffffffff as there is
>> no memory on that node.
> Wouldn't it make more sense to print something useful, like "memory-less
> node"?

in the log,

[    0.000000] NUMA: Initmem setup node 0 [mem 0x00000000-0x13fbffffff]
[    0.000000] NUMA: NODE_DATA [mem 0x13fbffe500-0x13fbffffff]
[    0.000000] NUMA: Initmem setup node 1 [mem 0x1400000000-0x17fbffffff]
[    0.000000] NUMA: NODE_DATA [mem 0x17fbfec500-0x17fbfedfff]
[    0.000000] NUMA: Initmem setup node 2 [mem 0x00000000-0xffffffffffffffff]
[    0.000000] NUMA: NODE_DATA [mem 0x17fbfeaa00-0x17fbfec4ff]
[    0.000000] NUMA: NODE_DATA(2) on node 1
[    0.000000] NUMA: Initmem setup node 3 [mem 0x00000000-0xffffffffffffffff]
[    0.000000] NUMA: NODE_DATA [mem 0x17fbfe8f00-0x17fbfea9ff]
[    0.000000] NUMA: NODE_DATA(3) on node 1

if printing "NUMA: Initmem setup node 2 [mem 0x00000000-0x00000000]",
it will make the log consistent with others, and obvious it's a memory-less
node as memory range 0x00000000-0x00000000, what do you think?

Thanks
Hanjun