[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <AANLkTi==t7SfjuLUoXmLawNL-jVqb8r3R7rOzjkjQh_Z@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 14 Feb 2011 08:14:36 -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 04/26] x86-64, NUMA: Unify {acpi|amd}_{numa_init|scan_nodes}()
arguments and return values
On Mon, Feb 14, 2011 at 3:29 AM, Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org> wrote:
> On Sat, Feb 12, 2011 at 10:39:03AM -0800, Yinghai Lu wrote:
>> > @@ -297,7 +297,10 @@ int __init acpi_numa_init(void)
>> > acpi_table_parse(ACPI_SIG_SLIT, acpi_parse_slit);
>> >
>> > acpi_numa_arch_fixup();
>> > - return ret;
>> > +
>> > + if (cnt <= 0)
>> > + return cnt ?: -ENOENT;
>> > + return 0;
>> > }
>> >
>> > int acpi_get_pxm(acpi_handle h)
>>
>>
>> it will break AMD system that does not have SRAT.
>>
>> your change will treat NO_SRAT as SRAT is there.
>
> Can you please elaborate a bit? Yinghai, there's brevity and there's
> being cryptic. I appreciate your reviews but don't want to spend time
> trying to decipher what you mean. If it doesn't hurt your fingers too
> much, please put a bit more effort into explaining.
when system have acpi support but SRAT is NOT there, new
acpi_numa_init() will return 0 just like SRAT is there and correct.
So it will skip AMD node scanning.
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/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists