From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Robin Holt Date: Thu, 09 Mar 2006 16:12:47 +0000 Subject: Re: [PATCH] fix for-loop in sn_hwperf_geoid_to_cnode() Message-Id: <20060309161247.GA26604@lnx-holt.americas.sgi.com> List-Id: References: <20060303150312.GA32225@sgi.com> In-Reply-To: <20060303150312.GA32225@sgi.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit To: linux-ia64@vger.kernel.org On Wed, Mar 08, 2006 at 04:55:45PM -0700, Bjorn Helgaas wrote: > On Wednesday 08 March 2006 15:02, Dean Roe wrote: > > On Mon, Mar 06, 2006 at 10:35:19AM -0700, Bjorn Helgaas wrote: > > > On Monday 06 March 2006 09:32, Dean Roe wrote: > > > > - for_each_node(cnode) { > > > > + /* > > > > + * FIXME: replace with cleaner for_each_XXX macro which addresses > > > > + * both compute and IO nodes once ACPI3.0 is available. > > > > + */ > > > > + for (cnode = 0; cnode < num_cnodes; cnode++) { > > > > > > I don't understand this ACPI 3.0 dependency. Can't you just define > > > for_each_XXX() the way you want it, and fill in the bitmask or whatever > > > it uses either (a) using ACPI 3.0 data, or (b) some interim hack? > > > > > > Bjorn > > > > I can't really tell from your response, so...did you see Jack's explanation > > of this? > > http://marc.theaimsgroup.com/?l=linux-ia64&m4141537904761&w=2 > > > > Are you saying you *really* want a for_each_sn_cnode() macro? I guess > > we can go that route if necessary...I just prefer the one-line change > > rather than changing 4-5 files when we aren't really sure yet what the > > final implementation will look like. > > I saw his response, but it wasn't clear to me what ACPI 3.0 is going > to solve. Are you saying that with ACPI 3.0, you will be able to > use for_each_node()? The node informatoin is stored in a single byte. With the introduction of I/O only nodes, we can easily exceed the 512 node limit placed on the byte size. ACPI 3.0 should raise that node limit to at least a 16-bit word. > > If that's the case, my question is, why can't you use for_each_node() > today, and use some interim hack to fill in node_possible_map? The node field size does not allow for it. > If not, what "for_each_XXX" macro are you planning to use when > you have ACPI 3.0? Not sure yet because ACPI 3.0 is still way off in the future. We will know more when that time comes. Robin