Re: [PATCH v2 1/3] arm64/numa: export memory_add_physaddr_to_nid as EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL

Michal Hocko
2020-07-07T11:55:00Z

On Tue 07-07-20 13:59:15, Jia He wrote:
> This exports memory_add_physaddr_to_nid() for module driver to use.
>
> memory_add_physaddr_to_nid() is a fallback option to get the nid in case
> NUMA_NO_NID is detected.
>
> Suggested-by: David Hildenbrand <david@redhat.com>
> Signed-off-by: Jia He <justin.he@arm.com>
> ---
> arch/arm64/mm/numa.c | 5 +++--
> 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/arch/arm64/mm/numa.c b/arch/arm64/mm/numa.c
> index aafcee3e3f7e..7eeb31740248 100644
> --- a/arch/arm64/mm/numa.c
> +++ b/arch/arm64/mm/numa.c
> @@ -464,10 +464,11 @@ void __init arm64_numa_init(void)
>
> /*
> * We hope that we will be hotplugging memory on nodes we already know about,
> - * such that acpi_get_node() succeeds and we never fall back to this...
> + * such that acpi_get_node() succeeds. But when SRAT is not present, the node
> + * id may be probed as NUMA_NO_NODE by acpi, Here provide a fallback option.
> */
> int memory_add_physaddr_to_nid(u64 addr)
> {
> - pr_warn("Unknown node for memory at 0x%llx, assuming node 0\n", addr);
> return 0;
> }
> +EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(memory_add_physaddr_to_nid);

Does it make sense to export a noop function? Wouldn't make more sense
to simply make it static inline somewhere in a header? I haven't checked
whether there is an easy way to do that sanely bu this just hit my eyes.
--
Michal Hocko
SUSE Labs