From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: David Daney Subject: Re: [PATCH v12 5/5] arm64, mm, numa: Add NUMA balancing support for arm64. Date: Fri, 26 Feb 2016 11:26:01 -0800 Message-ID: <56D0A6C9.40907@caviumnetworks.com> References: <1456192703-2274-1-git-send-email-ddaney.cavm@gmail.com> <1456192703-2274-6-git-send-email-ddaney.cavm@gmail.com> <20160226185356.GO29125@arm.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1"; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: In-Reply-To: <20160226185356.GO29125-5wv7dgnIgG8@public.gmane.org> Sender: devicetree-owner-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org To: Will Deacon Cc: David Daney , linux-arm-kernel-IAPFreCvJWM7uuMidbF8XUB+6BGkLq7r@public.gmane.org, Rob Herring , Pawel Moll , Mark Rutland , Ian Campbell , Kumar Gala , devicetree-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org, Ard Biesheuvel , Frank Rowand , Grant Likely , Catalin Marinas , Matt Fleming , linux-efi-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org, Ganapatrao Kulkarni , Robert Richter , linux-kernel-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org, David Daney List-Id: devicetree@vger.kernel.org On 02/26/2016 10:53 AM, Will Deacon wrote: > On Mon, Feb 22, 2016 at 05:58:23PM -0800, David Daney wrote: >> From: Ganapatrao Kulkarni >> >> Enable NUMA balancing for arm64 platforms. >> Add pte, pmd protnone helpers for use by automatic NUMA balancing. >> >> Reviewed-by: Robert Richter >> Signed-off-by: Ganapatrao Kulkarni >> Signed-off-by: David Daney >> --- >> arch/arm64/Kconfig | 1 + >> arch/arm64/include/asm/pgtable.h | 15 +++++++++++++++ >> 2 files changed, 16 insertions(+) >> >> diff --git a/arch/arm64/Kconfig b/arch/arm64/Kconfig >> index 9f0972a..6e22503 100644 >> --- a/arch/arm64/Kconfig >> +++ b/arch/arm64/Kconfig >> @@ -11,6 +11,7 @@ config ARM64 >> select ARCH_HAS_TICK_BROADCAST if GENERIC_CLOCKEVENTS_BROADCAST >> select ARCH_USE_CMPXCHG_LOCKREF >> select ARCH_SUPPORTS_ATOMIC_RMW >> + select ARCH_SUPPORTS_NUMA_BALANCING >> select ARCH_WANT_OPTIONAL_GPIOLIB >> select ARCH_WANT_COMPAT_IPC_PARSE_VERSION >> select ARCH_WANT_FRAME_POINTERS >> diff --git a/arch/arm64/include/asm/pgtable.h b/arch/arm64/include/asm/pgtable.h >> index bf464de..5af9db2 100644 >> --- a/arch/arm64/include/asm/pgtable.h >> +++ b/arch/arm64/include/asm/pgtable.h >> @@ -346,6 +346,21 @@ static inline pgprot_t mk_sect_prot(pgprot_t prot) >> return __pgprot(pgprot_val(prot) & ~PTE_TABLE_BIT); >> } >> >> +#ifdef CONFIG_NUMA_BALANCING >> +/* >> + * See the comment in include/asm-generic/pgtable.h >> + */ >> +static inline int pte_protnone(pte_t pte) >> +{ >> + return (pte_val(pte) & (PTE_VALID | PTE_PROT_NONE)) == PTE_PROT_NONE; >> +} >> + >> +static inline int pmd_protnone(pmd_t pmd) >> +{ >> + return pte_protnone(pmd_pte(pmd)); >> +} >> +#endif > > Can these not be macros, like our other pte_* and pmd_* predicates in > this header file? They probably could be. However there is precedence for the static inline form: $ git grep pte_protnone | grep '\.h' | grep -v return arch/arm64/include/asm/pgtable.h:static inline int pte_protnone(pte_t pte) arch/powerpc/include/asm/book3s/64/hash.h:static inline int pte_protnone(pte_t pte) arch/powerpc/include/asm/nohash/pgtable.h:static inline int pte_protnone(pte_t pte) arch/s390/include/asm/pgtable.h:static inline int pte_protnone(pte_t pte) arch/x86/include/asm/pgtable.h:static inline int pte_protnone(pte_t pte) include/asm-generic/pgtable.h:static inline int pte_protnone(pte_t pte) Actually I am a little surprised that all the arm64 pte_* and pmd_* things are not written as static inline to achieve added type safety. The generated code should be identical. > > Will > -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe devicetree" in the body of a message to majordomo-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html