[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <9cf4c5f3-f1ee-67c2-967e-07aa568685c4@redhat.com>
Date: Thu, 24 May 2018 10:54:19 +0200
From: David Hildenbrand <david@...hat.com>
To: "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rafael@...nel.org>
Cc: Linux Memory Management List <linux-mm@...ck.org>,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
"Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@...ysocki.net>,
Len Brown <lenb@...nel.org>,
ACPI Devel Maling List <linux-acpi@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH RFCv2 1/4] ACPI: NUMA: export pxm_to_node
On 24.05.2018 10:47, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> On Thu, May 24, 2018 at 10:33 AM, David Hildenbrand <david@...hat.com> wrote:
>> On 24.05.2018 10:12, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
>>> On Wed, May 23, 2018 at 8:24 PM, David Hildenbrand <david@...hat.com> wrote:
>>>> Will be needed by paravirtualized memory devices.
>>>
>>> That's a little information.
>>>
>>> It would be good to see the entire series at least.
>>
>> It's part of this series (guess you only received the cover letter and
>> this patch). Here a link to the patch using it:
>>
>> https://lkml.org/lkml/2018/5/23/803
>
> OK, thanks!
>
> It looks like you have a reason to use it in there, but please note
> that CONFIG_ACPI_NUMA depends on CONFIG_NUMA, so you don't need to use
> the latter directly in the #ifdef. Also wouldn't IS_ENABLED() work
> there?
Thanks for the tip on CONFIG_ACPI_NUMA. Wouldn't IS_ENABLED() require to
have a dummy implementation of pxm_to_node() in case drivers/acpi/numa.c
is not compiled?
>
> Moreover, you don't need the local node variable in
> virtio_mem_translate_node_id().
>
Indeed, thanks!
--
Thanks,
David / dhildenb
Powered by blists - more mailing lists