linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 15/26] x86-64, NUMA: Unify the rest of memblk registration

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <AANLkTin0C2AhtHm6K0av2N4pQxLvK_Fc+4w12Qg_QRkZ@mail.gmail.com>
Date:	Mon, 14 Feb 2011 08:08:08 -0800
From:	Yinghai Lu <yinghai@...nel.org>
To:	Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>
Cc:	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, x86@...nel.org, brgerst@...il.com,
	gorcunov@...il.com, shaohui.zheng@...el.com, rientjes@...gle.com,
	mingo@...e.hu, hpa@...ux.intel.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH 15/26] x86-64, NUMA: Unify the rest of memblk registration

On Mon, Feb 14, 2011 at 3:32 AM, Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org> wrote:
> Hello,
>
> On Sat, Feb 12, 2011 at 04:45:27PM -0800, Yinghai Lu wrote:
>> please don't put setup_node_bootmem calling into numa_register_memblks()
>> that is not related.
>>
>> put the calling in initmem_init() directly is more reasonable.
>
> No, I don't think so.  If you don't like the function name, let's
> change the name.  I think it's better to put all registrations there.
> Later in the series but function is changed to deal with struct
> numa_meminfo anyway so maybe it's better to rename it to
> numa_register_meminfo().

No, I don't like ***_register_*** take care of calling setup_bootmem.

Yinghai
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/