linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v5 12/14] arm64, acpi, numa: NUMA support based on SRAT and SLIT

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: <5717AE79.5060605@gmail.com>
Date:	Wed, 20 Apr 2016 09:29:45 -0700
From:	David Daney <ddaney.cavm@...il.com>
To:	Ganapatrao Kulkarni <gpkulkarni@...il.com>
CC:	Dennis Chen <dennis.chen@...aro.org>,
	Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@....com>,
	linux-ia64@...r.kernel.org, David Daney <david.daney@...ium.com>,
	Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@....com>,
	Will Deacon <will.deacon@....com>,
	Lv Zheng <lv.zheng@...el.com>,
	"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>,
	Frank Rowand <frowand.list@...il.com>, x86@...nel.org,
	Robert Moore <robert.moore@...el.com>,
	linux-acpi@...r.kernel.org, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>,
	Grant Likely <grant.likely@...aro.org>,
	Len Brown <lenb@...nel.org>, Fenghua Yu <fenghua.yu@...el.com>,
	Marc Zyngier <Marc.Zyngier@....com>,
	Robert Richter <rrichter@...ium.com>,
	Rob Herring <robh+dt@...nel.org>,
	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
	"linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org" 
	<linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>, devel@...ica.org,
	Tony Luck <tony.luck@...el.com>,
	"Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@...ysocki.net>,
	"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	Hanjun Guo <hanjun.guo@...aro.org>,
	Ganapatrao Kulkarni <gkulkarni@...iumnetworks.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v5 12/14] arm64, acpi, numa: NUMA support based on SRAT
 and SLIT

On 04/20/2016 01:31 AM, Ganapatrao Kulkarni wrote:
> On Wed, Apr 20, 2016 at 1:11 PM, Dennis Chen <dennis.chen@...aro.org> wrote:
>> On 20 April 2016 at 09:40, David Daney <ddaney.cavm@...il.com> wrote:
[...]
>>> @@ -388,7 +389,9 @@ static int __init dummy_numa_init(void)
>>>   void __init arm64_numa_init(void)
>>>   {
>>>          if (!numa_off) {
>>> -               if (!numa_init(of_numa_init))
>>> +               if (!acpi_disabled && !numa_init(arm64_acpi_numa_init))
>>> +                       return;
>>> +               if (acpi_disabled && !numa_init(of_numa_init))
>>>                          return;
>>>          }
>>>
>> On top of the latest version of the dt-based numa patch, if 'numa=off'
>> specified in the command line,
>> this function will fallback to invoke dummy_numa_init(), which give
>> rise the question here is, do we need to
>> touch any ACPI related stuff in the case? If not, then the output
>
> no, ACPI is not fallback configuration for DT and vice versa.
>
>> message "No NUMA configuration found" followed
>> seems is not necessary since it's a little bit confusing in case of
>> numa has already been turned off explicitly.
>
> thanks, this print can be moved out.
> from function dummy_numa_init and it can be added in function arm64_numa_init
> as a last line of if (!numa_off) to indicate, ACPI/DT based NUMA
> configuration failed.
>
> more appropriate would be,
> pr_info("%s\n", "NUMA configuration failed or not found");
>

Although purely cosmetic, I agree that we need to improve the messages 
as to not confuse people.

I will rework the messages with your suggestions in mind to see if we 
can get something that is both concise and unambiguously reflects what 
the user asked for.

David.