From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org>
Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand
	id S964886AbcBBQ6z (ORCPT <rfc822;w@1wt.eu>);
	Tue, 2 Feb 2016 11:58:55 -0500
Received: from foss.arm.com ([217.140.101.70]:57029 "EHLO foss.arm.com"
	rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP
	id S964833AbcBBQ6w (ORCPT <rfc822;linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>);
	Tue, 2 Feb 2016 11:58:52 -0500
Date: Tue, 2 Feb 2016 17:00:43 +0000
From: Lorenzo Pieralisi <lorenzo.pieralisi@arm.com>
To: Hanjun Guo <hanjun.guo@linaro.org>
Cc: Robert Richter <robert.richter@caviumnetworks.com>,
        Hanjun Guo <guohanjun@huawei.com>,
        "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@rjwysocki.net>,
        Will Deacon <will.deacon@arm.com>,
        Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@arm.com>, linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org,
        linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
        Ganapatrao Kulkarni <gkulkarni@caviumnetworks.com>,
        Shannon Zhao <shannon.zhao@linaro.org>,
        Steve Capper <steve.capper@linaro.org>,
        Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@arm.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 05/12] arm64, acpi, numa: NUMA support based on SRAT
 and SLIT
Message-ID: <20160202170043.GA30358@red-moon>
References: <1453541967-3744-1-git-send-email-guohanjun@huawei.com>
 <1453541967-3744-6-git-send-email-guohanjun@huawei.com>
 <20160201180944.GV24726@rric.localdomain>
 <56B09344.4000100@linaro.org>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <56B09344.4000100@linaro.org>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15)
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
List-ID: <linux-kernel.vger.kernel.org>
X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org

On Tue, Feb 02, 2016 at 07:30:12PM +0800, Hanjun Guo wrote:

[...]

> >How about the following (similar to x86)?
> >
> >----
> >	if (!numa_off) {
> >#ifdef CONFIG_ACPI_NUMA
> >		if (!numa_init(acpi_numa_init))
> >			return 0;
> >#endif
> >#ifdef CONFIG_OF_NUMA
> >		if (!numa_init(of_numa_init))
> >			return 0;
> >#endif
> >	}
> >
> >	return numa_init(dummy_numa_init);
> >----
> >
> >Pretty straight and nice.
> >
> >Note: The !acpi_disabled check needs to be moved to the beginning of
> >acpi_numa_init(). Variable ret can be removed.
> 
> Lorenzo suggested to remove it, Lorenzo, what's your opinion here?

I do not think it is a big deal. OF is not a fall-back for ACPI,
which is what the code above may make us think, either you parse
ACPI or you parse DT.

I will have a look at the complete code to check if we can rewrite
it differently but I would not be too worried about it.

Lorenzo