[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <574F8DA8.4040503@huawei.com>
Date: Thu, 2 Jun 2016 09:36:40 +0800
From: "Leizhen (ThunderTown)" <thunder.leizhen@...wei.com>
To: Rob Herring <robh+dt@...nel.org>
CC: Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@....com>,
Will Deacon <will.deacon@....com>,
linux-arm-kernel <linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>,
Ganapatrao Kulkarni <gkulkarni@...iumnetworks.com>,
Robert Richter <rrichter@...ium.com>,
"David Daney" <david.daney@...ium.com>,
Frank Rowand <frowand.list@...il.com>,
"Grant Likely" <grant.likely@...aro.org>,
devicetree <devicetree@...r.kernel.org>,
linux-kernel <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Zefan Li <lizefan@...wei.com>, Xinwei Hu <huxinwei@...wei.com>,
Tianhong Ding <dingtianhong@...wei.com>,
Hanjun Guo <guohanjun@...wei.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 2/5] of/numa: fix a memory@ node can only contains one
memory block
On 2016/6/2 4:13, Rob Herring wrote:
> On Sat, May 28, 2016 at 4:22 AM, Zhen Lei <thunder.leizhen@...wei.com> wrote:
>> For a normal memory@ devicetree node, its reg property can contains more
>> memory blocks.
>>
>> Because we don't known how many memory blocks maybe contained, so we try
>> from index=0, increase 1 until error returned(the end).
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Zhen Lei <thunder.leizhen@...wei.com>
>> ---
>> drivers/of/of_numa.c | 26 +++++++++-----------------
>> 1 file changed, 9 insertions(+), 17 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/drivers/of/of_numa.c b/drivers/of/of_numa.c
>> index fb71b4e..fa85a51 100644
>> --- a/drivers/of/of_numa.c
>> +++ b/drivers/of/of_numa.c
>> @@ -63,13 +63,9 @@ static int __init of_numa_parse_memory_nodes(void)
>> struct device_node *np = NULL;
>> struct resource rsrc;
>> u32 nid;
>> - int r = 0;
>> -
>> - for (;;) {
>> - np = of_find_node_by_type(np, "memory");
>> - if (!np)
>> - break;
>> + int i, r = 0;
>>
>> + for_each_node_by_type(np, "memory") {
>> r = of_property_read_u32(np, "numa-node-id", &nid);
>> if (r == -EINVAL)
>> /*
>> @@ -78,21 +74,17 @@ static int __init of_numa_parse_memory_nodes(void)
>> * "numa-node-id" property
>> */
>> continue;
>> - else if (r)
>> - /* some other error */
>> - break;
>>
>> - r = of_address_to_resource(np, 0, &rsrc);
>> - if (r) {
>> - pr_err("NUMA: bad reg property in memory node\n");
>> - break;
>> - }
>> + for (i = 0; !r && !of_address_to_resource(np, i, &rsrc); i++)
>> + r = numa_add_memblk(nid, rsrc.start, rsrc.end + 1);
>>
>> - r = numa_add_memblk(nid, rsrc.start, rsrc.end + 1);
>> - if (r)
>> + if (!i || r) {
>> + of_node_put(np);
>> + pr_err("NUMA: bad property in memory node\n");
>> + r = r ? : -EINVAL;
>> break;
>> + }
>> }
>> - of_node_put(np);
>
> I believe you still need this and not the one above. You only need it
> within the loop if you return. Otherwise, the last node always need to
> be put.
OK. Thanks.
Addition with Matthias's suggestion, I will move "return" into this patch, so that this of_node_put(np) can be safely removed.
>
> With that, for the series:
>
> Acked-by: Rob Herring <robh@...nel.org>
>
> Rob
>
> .
>
Powered by blists - more mailing lists