[PATCH v4 2/5] arm64, numa: Change the numa init functions name to be generic

[Atish Patra]

On Fri, Nov 6, 2020 at 9:14 AM Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas at arm.com> wrote:
>
> On Mon, Oct 05, 2020 at 05:17:49PM -0700, Atish Patra wrote:
> > diff --git a/arch/arm64/kernel/acpi_numa.c b/arch/arm64/kernel/acpi_numa.c
> > index 7ff800045434..96502ff92af5 100644
> > --- a/arch/arm64/kernel/acpi_numa.c
> > +++ b/arch/arm64/kernel/acpi_numa.c
> > @@ -117,16 +117,3 @@ void __init acpi_numa_gicc_affinity_init(struct acpi_srat_gicc_affinity *pa)
> >
> >       node_set(node, numa_nodes_parsed);
> >  }
> > -
> > -int __init arm64_acpi_numa_init(void)
> > -{
> > -     int ret;
> > -
> > -     ret = acpi_numa_init();
> > -     if (ret) {
> > -             pr_info("Failed to initialise from firmware\n");
> > -             return ret;
> > -     }
> > -
> > -     return srat_disabled() ? -EINVAL : 0;
> > -}
>
> I think it's better if arm64_acpi_numa_init() and arm64_numa_init()
> remained in the arm64 code. It's not really much code to be shared.
>

RISC-V will probably support ACPI one day. The idea is to not to do
exercise again in future.
Moreover, there will be arch_numa_init which will be used by RISC-V
and there will be arm64_numa_init
used by arm64. However, if you feel strongly about it, I am happy to
move back those two functions to arm64.

In case, we decide to go that route, can we define arm64_numa_init in
mm/init.c ?
Defining numa.c just for arm64_numa_init in arm64 may be an overkill.

> > diff --git a/drivers/base/arch_numa.c b/drivers/base/arch_numa.c
> > index 73f8b49d485c..74b4f2ddad70 100644
> > --- a/drivers/base/arch_numa.c
> > +++ b/drivers/base/arch_numa.c
> > @@ -13,7 +13,6 @@
> >  #include <linux/module.h>
> >  #include <linux/of.h>
> >
> > -#include <asm/acpi.h>
> >  #include <asm/sections.h>
> >
> >  struct pglist_data *node_data[MAX_NUMNODES] __read_mostly;
> > @@ -444,16 +443,37 @@ static int __init dummy_numa_init(void)
> >       return 0;
> >  }
> >
> > +#ifdef CONFIG_ACPI_NUMA
> > +static int __init arch_acpi_numa_init(void)
> > +{
> > +     int ret;
> > +
> > +     ret = acpi_numa_init();
> > +     if (ret) {
> > +             pr_info("Failed to initialise from firmware\n");
> > +             return ret;
> > +     }
> > +
> > +     return srat_disabled() ? -EINVAL : 0;
> > +}
> > +#else
> > +static int __init arch_acpi_numa_init(void)
> > +{
> > +     return -EOPNOTSUPP;
> > +}
> > +
> > +#endif
> > +
> >  /**
> > - * arm64_numa_init() - Initialize NUMA
> > + * arch_numa_init() - Initialize NUMA
> >   *
> >   * Try each configured NUMA initialization method until one succeeds. The
> > - * last fallback is dummy single node config encomapssing whole memory.
> > + * last fallback is dummy single node config encompassing whole memory.
> >   */
> > -void __init arm64_numa_init(void)
> > +void __init arch_numa_init(void)
> >  {
> >       if (!numa_off) {
> > -             if (!acpi_disabled && !numa_init(arm64_acpi_numa_init))
> > +             if (!acpi_disabled && !numa_init(arch_acpi_numa_init))
> >                       return;
> >               if (acpi_disabled && !numa_init(of_numa_init))
> >                       return;
>
> Does riscv even have an acpi_disabled variable?
>
It is defined in "include/linux/acpi.h" which is included in arch_numa.c

> --
> Catalin
>
> _______________________________________________
> linux-riscv mailing list
> linux-riscv at lists.infradead.org
> http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-riscv



-- 
Regards,
Atish