From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from psmtp.com (na3sys010amx124.postini.com [74.125.245.124]) by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 98E766B0032 for ; Mon, 17 Jun 2013 20:53:19 -0400 (EDT) Received: by mail-ye0-f172.google.com with SMTP id l13so1167928yen.3 for ; Mon, 17 Jun 2013 17:53:18 -0700 (PDT) Date: Mon, 17 Jun 2013 17:53:11 -0700 From: Tejun Heo Subject: Re: [Part1 PATCH v5 10/22] x86, mm, numa: Move two functions calling on successful path later Message-ID: <20130618005311.GT32663@mtj.dyndns.org> References: <1371128589-8953-1-git-send-email-tangchen@cn.fujitsu.com> <1371128589-8953-11-git-send-email-tangchen@cn.fujitsu.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <1371128589-8953-11-git-send-email-tangchen@cn.fujitsu.com> Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org List-ID: To: Tang Chen Cc: tglx@linutronix.de, mingo@elte.hu, hpa@zytor.com, akpm@linux-foundation.org, trenn@suse.de, yinghai@kernel.org, jiang.liu@huawei.com, wency@cn.fujitsu.com, laijs@cn.fujitsu.com, isimatu.yasuaki@jp.fujitsu.com, mgorman@suse.de, minchan@kernel.org, mina86@mina86.com, gong.chen@linux.intel.com, vasilis.liaskovitis@profitbricks.com, lwoodman@redhat.com, riel@redhat.com, jweiner@redhat.com, prarit@redhat.com, x86@kernel.org, linux-doc@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-mm@kvack.org Hello, Does the subject match the patch content? What two functions? The patch is separating out the actual registration part so that the discovery part can happen earlier, right? > Currently, parsing numa info needs to allocate some buffer and need to be > called after init_mem_mapping. So try to split parsing numa info procedure > into two steps: > - The first step will be called before init_mem_mapping, and it > should not need allocate buffers. Document the requirement somewhere in the source code? > - The second step will cantain all the buffer related code and be > executed later. > > At last we will have early_initmem_init() and initmem_init(). Do you mean "eventually" or "in the end" by "at last"? > This patch implements only the first step. > > setup_node_data() and numa_init_array() are only called for successful > path, so we can move these two callings to x86_numa_init(). That will also > make numa_init() smaller and more readable. I find the description somewhat difficult to follow. :( > -v2: remove online_node_map clear in numa_init(), as it is only > set in setup_node_data() at last in successful path. I don't get this. What prevents specific numa init functions (numaq, x86_acpi, amd...) from updating node_online_map? Thanks. -- tejun -- 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: email@kvack.org