Re: [PATCH v7 08/14] arm64: numa: Use pr_fmt()

Leizhen (ThunderTown)
2016-08-27T09:15:47Z

On 2016/8/26 20:54, Will Deacon wrote:
> On Wed, Aug 24, 2016 at 03:44:47PM +0800, Zhen Lei wrote:
>> From: Kefeng Wang <wangkefeng.wang@huawei.com>
>>
>> Use pr_fmt to prefix kernel output, and remove duplicated msg
>> of NUMA turned off.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Kefeng Wang <wangkefeng.wang@huawei.com>
>> ---
>> arch/arm64/mm/numa.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++--------------------
>> 1 file changed, 20 insertions(+), 20 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/arch/arm64/mm/numa.c b/arch/arm64/mm/numa.c
>> index d97c6e2..7b73808 100644
>> --- a/arch/arm64/mm/numa.c
>> +++ b/arch/arm64/mm/numa.c
>> @@ -17,6 +17,8 @@
>> * along with this program. If not, see <http://www.gnu.org/licenses/>.
>> */
>>
>> +#define pr_fmt(fmt) "numa: " fmt
>
> Shouldn't this be uppercase for consistency with the existing code and
> the code in places like drivers/of/of_numa.c?
OK, I will change it to "NUMA: ".

>
>> #include <linux/acpi.h>
>> #include <linux/bootmem.h>
>> #include <linux/memblock.h>
>> @@ -38,10 +40,9 @@ static __init int numa_parse_early_param(char *opt)
>> {
>> if (!opt)
>> return -EINVAL;
>> - if (!strncmp(opt, "off", 3)) {
>> - pr_info("%s\n", "NUMA turned off");
>> + if (!strncmp(opt, "off", 3))
>> numa_off = true;
>> - }
>> +
>> return 0;
>> }
>> early_param("numa", numa_parse_early_param);
>> @@ -110,7 +111,7 @@ static void __init setup_node_to_cpumask_map(void)
>> set_cpu_numa_node(cpu, NUMA_NO_NODE);
>>
>> /* cpumask_of_node() will now work */
>> - pr_debug("NUMA: Node to cpumask map for %d nodes\n", nr_node_ids);
>> + pr_debug("Node to cpumask map for %d nodes\n", nr_node_ids);
>> }
>>
>> /*
>> @@ -145,13 +146,13 @@ int __init numa_add_memblk(int nid, u64 start, u64 end)
>>
>> ret = memblock_set_node(start, (end - start), &memblock.memory, nid);
>> if (ret < 0) {
>> - pr_err("NUMA: memblock [0x%llx - 0x%llx] failed to add on node %d\n",
>> + pr_err("memblock [0x%llx - 0x%llx] failed to add on node %d\n",
>> start, (end - 1), nid);
>> return ret;
>> }
>>
>> node_set(nid, numa_nodes_parsed);
>> - pr_info("NUMA: Adding memblock [0x%llx - 0x%llx] on node %d\n",
>> + pr_info("Adding memblock [0x%llx - 0x%llx] on node %d\n",
>> start, (end - 1), nid);
>> return ret;
>> }
>> @@ -166,19 +167,18 @@ static void __init setup_node_data(int nid, u64 start_pfn, u64 end_pfn)
>> void *nd;
>> int tnid;
>>
>> - pr_info("NUMA: Initmem setup node %d [mem %#010Lx-%#010Lx]\n",
>> - nid, start_pfn << PAGE_SHIFT,
>> - (end_pfn << PAGE_SHIFT) - 1);
>> + pr_info("Initmem setup node %d [mem %#010Lx-%#010Lx]\n",
>> + nid, start_pfn << PAGE_SHIFT, (end_pfn << PAGE_SHIFT) - 1);
>>
>> nd_pa = memblock_alloc_try_nid(nd_size, SMP_CACHE_BYTES, nid);
>> nd = __va(nd_pa);
>>
>> /* report and initialize */
>> - pr_info("NUMA: NODE_DATA [mem %#010Lx-%#010Lx]\n",
>> + pr_info(" NODE_DATA [mem %#010Lx-%#010Lx]\n",
>
> Why are you adding leading whitespace?
Kefeng Wang said that just in order to make the final print info looks more clear.

I will remove the leading whitespace in v8.

>
>> nd_pa, nd_pa + nd_size - 1);
>> tnid = early_pfn_to_nid(nd_pa >> PAGE_SHIFT);
>> if (tnid != nid)
>> - pr_info("NUMA: NODE_DATA(%d) on node %d\n", nid, tnid);
>> + pr_info(" NODE_DATA(%d) on node %d\n", nid, tnid);
>
>
> Same here.
>
>> node_data[nid] = nd;
>> memset(NODE_DATA(nid), 0, sizeof(pg_data_t));
>> @@ -235,8 +235,7 @@ static int __init numa_alloc_distance(void)
>> numa_distance[i * numa_distance_cnt + j] = i == j ?
>> LOCAL_DISTANCE : REMOTE_DISTANCE;
>>
>> - pr_debug("NUMA: Initialized distance table, cnt=%d\n",
>> - numa_distance_cnt);
>> + pr_debug("Initialized distance table, cnt=%d\n", numa_distance_cnt);
>>
>> return 0;
>> }
>> @@ -257,20 +256,20 @@ static int __init numa_alloc_distance(void)
>> void __init numa_set_distance(int from, int to, int distance)
>> {
>> if (!numa_distance) {
>> - pr_warn_once("NUMA: Warning: distance table not allocated yet\n");
>> + pr_warn_once("Warning: distance table not allocated yet\n");
>> return;
>> }
>>
>> if (from >= numa_distance_cnt || to >= numa_distance_cnt ||
>> from < 0 || to < 0) {
>> - pr_warn_once("NUMA: Warning: node ids are out of bound, from=%d to=%d distance=%d\n",
>> + pr_warn_once("Warning: node ids are out of bound, from=%d to=%d distance=%d\n",
>> from, to, distance);
>> return;
>> }
>>
>> if ((u8)distance != distance ||
>> (from == to && distance != LOCAL_DISTANCE)) {
>> - pr_warn_once("NUMA: Warning: invalid distance parameter, from=%d to=%d distance=%d\n",
>> + pr_warn_once("Warning: invalid distance parameter, from=%d to=%d distance=%d\n",
>> from, to, distance);
>> return;
>> }
>> @@ -297,7 +296,7 @@ static int __init numa_register_nodes(void)
>> /* Check that valid nid is set to memblks */
>> for_each_memblock(memory, mblk)
>> if (mblk->nid == NUMA_NO_NODE || mblk->nid >= MAX_NUMNODES) {
>> - pr_warn("NUMA: Warning: invalid memblk node %d [mem %#010Lx-%#010Lx]\n",
>> + pr_warn("Warning: invalid memblk node %d [mem %#010Lx-%#010Lx]\n",
>> mblk->nid, mblk->base,
>> mblk->base + mblk->size - 1);
>> return -EINVAL;
>> @@ -368,9 +367,10 @@ static int __init dummy_numa_init(void)
>> struct memblock_region *mblk;
>>
>> if (numa_off)
>> - pr_info("NUMA disabled\n"); /* Forced off on command line. */
>> - pr_info("NUMA: Faking a node at [mem %#018Lx-%#018Lx]\n",
>> - 0LLU, PFN_PHYS(max_pfn) - 1);
>> + pr_warn("NUMA turned off by user\n"); /* Forced off on command line. */
>
> Why are you changing the string? What's wrong with "NUMA turned off" like
> we had before?
OK. I will keep it no change in v8.

>
> Will
>
> .
>