public inbox for linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Tejun Heo <tj@kernel.org>
To: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, x86@kernel.org, yinghai@kernel.org,
	brgerst@gmail.com, gorcunov@gmail.com, shaohui.zheng@intel.com,
	rientjes@google.com, mingo@elte.hu, hpa@linux.intel.com,
	ankita@in.ibm.com
Cc: Tejun Heo <tj@kernel.org>
Subject: [PATCH 19/33] x86-64, NUMA: Separate out numa_cleanup_meminfo()
Date: Wed, 16 Feb 2011 13:20:53 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <1297858867-25981-20-git-send-email-tj@kernel.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1297858867-25981-1-git-send-email-tj@kernel.org>

Separate out numa_cleanup_meminfo() from numa_register_memblks().
node_possible_map initialization is moved to the top of the split
numa_register_memblks().

This patch doesn't cause behavior change.

Signed-off-by: Tejun Heo <tj@kernel.org>
Cc: Yinghai Lu <yinghai@kernel.org>
Cc: Brian Gerst <brgerst@gmail.com>
Cc: Cyrill Gorcunov <gorcunov@gmail.com>
Cc: Shaohui Zheng <shaohui.zheng@intel.com>
Cc: David Rientjes <rientjes@google.com>
Cc: Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>
Cc: H. Peter Anvin <hpa@linux.intel.com>
---
 arch/x86/mm/numa_64.c |   83 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++----------------------
 1 files changed, 46 insertions(+), 37 deletions(-)

diff --git a/arch/x86/mm/numa_64.c b/arch/x86/mm/numa_64.c
index c3496e2..f2721de 100644
--- a/arch/x86/mm/numa_64.c
+++ b/arch/x86/mm/numa_64.c
@@ -292,40 +292,8 @@ setup_node_bootmem(int nodeid, unsigned long start, unsigned long end)
 	node_set_online(nodeid);
 }
 
-/*
- * Sanity check to catch more bad NUMA configurations (they are amazingly
- * common).  Make sure the nodes cover all memory.
- */
-static int __init nodes_cover_memory(const struct bootnode *nodes)
+static int __init numa_cleanup_meminfo(struct numa_meminfo *mi)
 {
-	unsigned long numaram, e820ram;
-	int i;
-
-	numaram = 0;
-	for_each_node_mask(i, mem_nodes_parsed) {
-		unsigned long s = nodes[i].start >> PAGE_SHIFT;
-		unsigned long e = nodes[i].end >> PAGE_SHIFT;
-		numaram += e - s;
-		numaram -= __absent_pages_in_range(i, s, e);
-		if ((long)numaram < 0)
-			numaram = 0;
-	}
-
-	e820ram = max_pfn -
-		(memblock_x86_hole_size(0, max_pfn<<PAGE_SHIFT) >> PAGE_SHIFT);
-	/* We seem to lose 3 pages somewhere. Allow 1M of slack. */
-	if ((long)(e820ram - numaram) >= (1<<(20 - PAGE_SHIFT))) {
-		printk(KERN_ERR "NUMA: nodes only cover %luMB of your %luMB e820 RAM. Not used.\n",
-			(numaram << PAGE_SHIFT) >> 20,
-			(e820ram << PAGE_SHIFT) >> 20);
-		return 0;
-	}
-	return 1;
-}
-
-static int __init numa_register_memblks(void)
-{
-	struct numa_meminfo *mi = &numa_meminfo;
 	int i;
 
 	/*
@@ -368,6 +336,49 @@ static int __init numa_register_memblks(void)
 		}
 	}
 
+	return 0;
+}
+
+/*
+ * Sanity check to catch more bad NUMA configurations (they are amazingly
+ * common).  Make sure the nodes cover all memory.
+ */
+static int __init nodes_cover_memory(const struct bootnode *nodes)
+{
+	unsigned long numaram, e820ram;
+	int i;
+
+	numaram = 0;
+	for_each_node_mask(i, mem_nodes_parsed) {
+		unsigned long s = nodes[i].start >> PAGE_SHIFT;
+		unsigned long e = nodes[i].end >> PAGE_SHIFT;
+		numaram += e - s;
+		numaram -= __absent_pages_in_range(i, s, e);
+		if ((long)numaram < 0)
+			numaram = 0;
+	}
+
+	e820ram = max_pfn - (memblock_x86_hole_size(0,
+					max_pfn << PAGE_SHIFT) >> PAGE_SHIFT);
+	/* We seem to lose 3 pages somewhere. Allow 1M of slack. */
+	if ((long)(e820ram - numaram) >= (1 << (20 - PAGE_SHIFT))) {
+		printk(KERN_ERR "NUMA: nodes only cover %luMB of your %luMB e820 RAM. Not used.\n",
+		       (numaram << PAGE_SHIFT) >> 20,
+		       (e820ram << PAGE_SHIFT) >> 20);
+		return 0;
+	}
+	return 1;
+}
+
+static int __init numa_register_memblks(struct numa_meminfo *mi)
+{
+	int i;
+
+	/* Account for nodes with cpus and no memory */
+	nodes_or(node_possible_map, mem_nodes_parsed, cpu_nodes_parsed);
+	if (WARN_ON(nodes_empty(node_possible_map)))
+		return -EINVAL;
+
 	memnode_shift = compute_hash_shift(mi);
 	if (memnode_shift < 0) {
 		printk(KERN_ERR "NUMA: No NUMA node hash function found. Contact maintainer\n");
@@ -823,12 +834,10 @@ void __init initmem_init(void)
 		nodes_clear(node_possible_map);
 		nodes_clear(node_online_map);
 #endif
-		/* Account for nodes with cpus and no memory */
-		nodes_or(node_possible_map, mem_nodes_parsed, cpu_nodes_parsed);
-		if (WARN_ON(nodes_empty(node_possible_map)))
+		if (numa_cleanup_meminfo(&numa_meminfo) < 0)
 			continue;
 
-		if (numa_register_memblks() < 0)
+		if (numa_register_memblks(&numa_meminfo) < 0)
 			continue;
 
 		for (j = 0; j < nr_cpu_ids; j++) {
-- 
1.7.1


  parent reply	other threads:[~2011-02-16 12:21 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 45+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2011-02-16 12:20 [PATCHSET x86/numa] x86-64, NUMA: bring sanity to NUMA config/emulation Tejun Heo
2011-02-16 12:20 ` [PATCH 01/33] x86-64, NUMA: Make dummy node initialization path similar to non-dummy ones Tejun Heo
2011-02-16 12:20 ` [PATCH 02/33] x86-64, NUMA: Simplify hotplug node handling in acpi_numa_memory_affinity_init() Tejun Heo
2011-02-16 12:20 ` [PATCH 03/33] x86, NUMA: Drop @start/last_pfn from initmem_init() Tejun Heo
2011-02-16 12:20 ` [PATCH 04/33] x86-64, NUMA: Unify {acpi|amd}_{numa_init|scan_nodes}() arguments and return values Tejun Heo
2011-02-16 12:20 ` [PATCH 05/33] x86-64, NUMA: Wrap acpi_numa_init() so that failure can be indicated by return value Tejun Heo
2011-02-16 12:20 ` [PATCH 06/33] x86, NUMA: Move *_numa_init() invocations into initmem_init() Tejun Heo
2011-02-16 12:20 ` [PATCH 07/33] x86-64, NUMA: Restructure initmem_init() Tejun Heo
2011-02-16 12:20 ` [PATCH 08/33] x86-64, NUMA: Use common {cpu|mem}_nodes_parsed Tejun Heo
2011-02-16 12:20 ` [PATCH 09/33] x86-64, NUMA: Remove local variable found from amd_numa_init() Tejun Heo
2011-02-16 12:20 ` [PATCH 10/33] x86-64, NUMA: Move apicid to numa mapping initialization from amd_scan_nodes() to amd_numa_init() Tejun Heo
2011-02-16 12:20 ` [PATCH 11/33] x86-64, NUMA: Use common numa_nodes[] Tejun Heo
2011-02-16 12:20 ` [PATCH 12/33] x86-64, NUMA: Kill {acpi|amd}_get_nodes() Tejun Heo
2011-02-16 12:20 ` [PATCH 13/33] x86-64, NUMA: Factor out memblk handling into numa_{add|register}_memblk() Tejun Heo
2011-02-16 16:15   ` [PATCH UPDATED " Tejun Heo
2011-02-16 12:20 ` [PATCH 14/33] x86-64, NUMA: Unify use of memblk in all init methods Tejun Heo
2011-02-16 12:20 ` [PATCH 15/33] x86-64, NUMA: Unify the rest of memblk registration Tejun Heo
2011-02-16 12:20 ` [PATCH 16/33] x86-64, NUMA: Kill {acpi|amd|dummy}_scan_nodes() Tejun Heo
2011-02-16 12:20 ` [PATCH 17/33] x86-64, NUMA: Remove %NULL @nodeids handling from compute_hash_shift() Tejun Heo
2011-02-16 12:20 ` [PATCH 18/33] x86-64, NUMA: Introduce struct numa_meminfo Tejun Heo
2011-02-16 12:20 ` Tejun Heo [this message]
2011-02-16 12:20 ` [PATCH 20/33] x86-64, NUMA: make numa_cleanup_meminfo() prettier Tejun Heo
2011-02-16 12:20 ` [PATCH 21/33] x86-64, NUMA: consolidate and improve memblk sanity checks Tejun Heo
2011-02-16 12:20 ` [PATCH 22/33] x86-64, NUMA: Add common find_node_by_addr() Tejun Heo
2011-02-16 12:20 ` [PATCH 23/33] x86-64, NUMA: Kill numa_nodes[] Tejun Heo
2011-02-16 12:20 ` [PATCH 24/33] x86-64, NUMA: Rename cpu_nodes_parsed to numa_nodes_parsed Tejun Heo
2011-02-16 12:20 ` [PATCH 25/33] x86-64, NUMA: Kill mem_nodes_parsed Tejun Heo
2011-02-16 12:21 ` [PATCH 26/33] x86-64, NUMA: Implement generic node distance handling Tejun Heo
2011-02-16 12:21 ` [PATCH 27/33] x86-64, NUMA: Trivial changes to prepare for emulation updates Tejun Heo
2011-02-16 12:21 ` [PATCH 28/33] x86-64, NUMA: Build and use direct emulated nid -> phys nid mapping Tejun Heo
2011-02-16 14:14   ` [PATCH UPDATED " Tejun Heo
2011-02-16 12:21 ` [PATCH 29/33] x86-64, NUMA: Make emulation code build numa_meminfo and share the registration path Tejun Heo
2011-02-16 12:21 ` [PATCH 30/33] x86-64, NUMA: Wrap node ID during emulation Tejun Heo
2011-02-16 12:21 ` [PATCH 31/33] x86-64, NUMA: Emulate directly from numa_meminfo Tejun Heo
2011-02-16 12:21 ` [PATCH 32/33] x86-64, NUMA: Unify emulated apicid -> node mapping transformation Tejun Heo
2011-02-16 12:21 ` [PATCH 33/33] x86-64, NUMA: Unify emulated distance mapping Tejun Heo
2011-02-16 12:52 ` [PATCHSET x86/numa] x86-64, NUMA: bring sanity to NUMA config/emulation Ingo Molnar
2011-02-16 14:17   ` Tejun Heo
2011-02-16 15:53     ` Ingo Molnar
2011-02-16 16:23       ` Tejun Heo
2011-02-16 17:29         ` Ingo Molnar
2011-02-16 17:33           ` Tejun Heo
2011-02-17 12:35           ` [boot crash] " Ingo Molnar
2011-02-17 12:48             ` Tejun Heo
2011-02-17 16:10               ` Ingo Molnar

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=1297858867-25981-20-git-send-email-tj@kernel.org \
    --to=tj@kernel.org \
    --cc=ankita@in.ibm.com \
    --cc=brgerst@gmail.com \
    --cc=gorcunov@gmail.com \
    --cc=hpa@linux.intel.com \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=mingo@elte.hu \
    --cc=rientjes@google.com \
    --cc=shaohui.zheng@intel.com \
    --cc=x86@kernel.org \
    --cc=yinghai@kernel.org \
    /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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox