[PATCH] x86/mm/numa: Use NUMA_NO_NODE when calling memblock_set_node()

[PATCH] x86/mm/numa: Use NUMA_NO_NODE when calling memblock_set_node()

[Borislav Petkov]

From: "Borislav Petkov (AMD)" <bp@alien8.de>

memblock_set_node() warns about using MAX_NUMNODES, see

  e0eec24e2e19 ("memblock: make memblock_set_node() also warn about use of MAX_NUMNODES")

for details.

Reported-by: Narasimhan V <Narasimhan.V@amd.com>
Signed-off-by: Borislav Petkov (AMD) <bp@alien8.de>
---
 arch/x86/mm/numa.c | 4 ++--
 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)

diff --git a/arch/x86/mm/numa.c b/arch/x86/mm/numa.c
index ce84ba86e69e..b44a3ae51e9a 100644
--- a/arch/x86/mm/numa.c
+++ b/arch/x86/mm/numa.c
@@ -614,9 +614,9 @@ static int __init numa_init(int (*init_func)(void))
 	nodes_clear(node_online_map);
 	memset(&numa_meminfo, 0, sizeof(numa_meminfo));
 	WARN_ON(memblock_set_node(0, ULLONG_MAX, &memblock.memory,
-				  MAX_NUMNODES));
+				  NUMA_NO_NODE));
 	WARN_ON(memblock_set_node(0, ULLONG_MAX, &memblock.reserved,
-				  MAX_NUMNODES));
+				  NUMA_NO_NODE));
 	/* In case that parsing SRAT failed. */
 	WARN_ON(memblock_clear_hotplug(0, ULLONG_MAX));
 	numa_reset_distance();
-- 
2.43.0

Re: [PATCH] x86/mm/numa: Use NUMA_NO_NODE when calling memblock_set_node()

[Mike Rapoport]

On Mon, Jun 03, 2024 at 04:10:05PM +0200, Borislav Petkov wrote:
> From: "Borislav Petkov (AMD)" <bp@alien8.de>
> 
> memblock_set_node() warns about using MAX_NUMNODES, see
> 
>   e0eec24e2e19 ("memblock: make memblock_set_node() also warn about use of MAX_NUMNODES")
> 
> for details.
> 
> Reported-by: Narasimhan V <Narasimhan.V@amd.com>
> Signed-off-by: Borislav Petkov (AMD) <bp@alien8.de>

Reviewed-by: Mike Rapoport (IBM) <rppt@kernel.org>

> ---
>  arch/x86/mm/numa.c | 4 ++--
>  1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/arch/x86/mm/numa.c b/arch/x86/mm/numa.c
> index ce84ba86e69e..b44a3ae51e9a 100644
> --- a/arch/x86/mm/numa.c
> +++ b/arch/x86/mm/numa.c
> @@ -614,9 +614,9 @@ static int __init numa_init(int (*init_func)(void))
>  	nodes_clear(node_online_map);
>  	memset(&numa_meminfo, 0, sizeof(numa_meminfo));
>  	WARN_ON(memblock_set_node(0, ULLONG_MAX, &memblock.memory,
> -				  MAX_NUMNODES));
> +				  NUMA_NO_NODE));
>  	WARN_ON(memblock_set_node(0, ULLONG_MAX, &memblock.reserved,
> -				  MAX_NUMNODES));
> +				  NUMA_NO_NODE));
>  	/* In case that parsing SRAT failed. */
>  	WARN_ON(memblock_clear_hotplug(0, ULLONG_MAX));
>  	numa_reset_distance();
> -- 
> 2.43.0
> 

-- 
Sincerely yours,
Mike.

Re: [PATCH] x86/mm/numa: Use NUMA_NO_NODE when calling memblock_set_node()

[Mike Rapoport]

From: Mike Rapoport (IBM) <rppt@kernel.org>

On Mon, 03 Jun 2024 16:10:05 +0200, Borislav Petkov wrote:
> memblock_set_node() warns about using MAX_NUMNODES, see
> 
>   e0eec24e2e19 ("memblock: make memblock_set_node() also warn about use of MAX_NUMNODES")
> 
> for details.
> 
> 
> [...]

Applied to fixes branch of memblock.git tree, thanks!

[1/1] x86/mm/numa: Use NUMA_NO_NODE when calling memblock_set_node()
      commit: c55f3cc2d9f241d6e45336fd48dafa755c012297

tree: https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/rppt/memblock
branch: fixes

--
Sincerely yours,
Mike.

Re: [PATCH] x86/mm/numa: Use NUMA_NO_NODE when calling memblock_set_node()

[Mike Rapoport]

On Tue, Jun 04, 2024 at 04:16:57PM +0300, Mike Rapoport wrote:
> On Mon, 03 Jun 2024 16:10:05 +0200, Borislav Petkov wrote:
> > memblock_set_node() warns about using MAX_NUMNODES, see
> > 
> >   e0eec24e2e19 ("memblock: make memblock_set_node() also warn about use of MAX_NUMNODES")
> > 
> > for details.
> > 
> > 
> > [...]
> 
> Applied to fixes branch of memblock.git tree, thanks!
> 
> [1/1] x86/mm/numa: Use NUMA_NO_NODE when calling memblock_set_node()
>       commit: c55f3cc2d9f241d6e45336fd48dafa755c012297
> 
> tree: https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/rppt/memblock
> branch: fixes

There was a similar, but better fix from Jan Beulich:

https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/abadb736-a239-49e4-ab42-ace7acdd4278@suse.com/

that also updated numa_clear_kernel_node_hotplug().

I'm going to replace this patch with his and use Boris' changelog as more
appropriate.
 
> --
> Sincerely yours,
> Mike.
> 

-- 
Sincerely yours,
Mike.