Re: [PATCH RFC v2 1/2] linux/vnuma: vNUMA for PV domu guest

[Elena Ufimtseva <ufimtseva@gmail.com>]

On Wed, Sep 18, 2013 at 3:33 AM, Dario Faggioli
<dario.faggioli@citrix.com> wrote:
> On mer, 2013-09-18 at 02:30 -0400, Elena Ufimtseva wrote:
>> On Tue, Sep 17, 2013 at 10:21 AM, Boris Ostrovsky
>>
>> >> +int __init xen_numa_init(void)
>> >> +{
> [snip]
>> >> +       setup_nr_node_ids();
>> >> +       /* Setting the cpu, apicid to node */
>> >> +       for_each_cpu(cpu, cpu_possible_mask) {
>> >> +               set_apicid_to_node(cpu, cpu_to_node[cpu]);
>> >> +               numa_set_node(cpu, cpu_to_node[cpu]);
>> >> +               __apicid_to_node[cpu] = cpu_to_node[cpu];
>> >
>> >
>> > Isn't this what set_apicid_to_node() above will do?
>>
>> Yes, exactly the same ) will fix.
>>
> I seem to recall that something strange was happening if we do not do
> this in this way (i.e., calling the same stuff twice, or something like
> that), isn't it so Elena?
>
I think its in the past as proper ordering made sense and that second
call was removed :)

> If it is, please, explain that in a comment. However, it may well be
> possible that my recollection is wrong.. In which case, sorry for the
> noise.
>
> Anyway, in general, and both for this series and for the Xen one, I
> think the code could use a little bit more of commenting (along with the
> breaking up in paragraphs, as many have already pointed out).
>
> I know, I know, too much comments is also bad... Actually, finding the
> right balance between too few and too much is as much important as it is
> difficult! :-P

I see that ) I will learn.
>
> Dario
>
> --
> <<This happens because I choose it to happen!>> (Raistlin Majere)
> -----------------------------------------------------------------
> Dario Faggioli, Ph.D, http://about.me/dario.faggioli
> Senior Software Engineer, Citrix Systems R&D Ltd., Cambridge (UK)
>



-- 
Elena