[PATCH 19/33] x86-64, NUMA: Separate out numa_cleanup_meminfo()

Tejun Heo
2011-02-16T12:21:59Z

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