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
next prev 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