[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <871rld8mic.fsf@morokweng.localdomain>
Date: Wed, 15 Jul 2020 00:50:35 -0300
From: Thiago Jung Bauermann <bauerman@...ux.ibm.com>
To: Hari Bathini <hbathini@...ux.ibm.com>
Cc: Michael Ellerman <mpe@...erman.id.au>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
Pingfan Liu <piliu@...hat.com>,
Kexec-ml <kexec@...ts.infradead.org>,
Mimi Zohar <zohar@...ux.ibm.com>,
Nayna Jain <nayna@...ux.ibm.com>,
Petr Tesarik <ptesarik@...e.cz>,
Mahesh J Salgaonkar <mahesh@...ux.ibm.com>,
Sourabh Jain <sourabhjain@...ux.ibm.com>,
lkml <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
linuxppc-dev <linuxppc-dev@...abs.org>,
Eric Biederman <ebiederm@...ssion.com>,
Dave Young <dyoung@...hat.com>, Vivek Goyal <vgoyal@...hat.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 05/12] powerpc/drmem: make lmb walk a bit more flexible
Hari Bathini <hbathini@...ux.ibm.com> writes:
> @@ -534,7 +537,7 @@ static int __init early_init_dt_scan_memory_ppc(unsigned long node,
> #ifdef CONFIG_PPC_PSERIES
> if (depth == 1 &&
> strcmp(uname, "ibm,dynamic-reconfiguration-memory") == 0) {
> - walk_drmem_lmbs_early(node, early_init_drmem_lmb);
> + walk_drmem_lmbs_early(node, NULL, early_init_drmem_lmb);
walk_drmem_lmbs_early() can now fail. Should this failure be propagated
as a return value of early_init_dt_scan_memory_ppc()?
> return 0;
> }
> #endif
<snip>
> @@ -787,7 +790,7 @@ static int __init parse_numa_properties(void)
> */
> memory = of_find_node_by_path("/ibm,dynamic-reconfiguration-memory");
> if (memory) {
> - walk_drmem_lmbs(memory, numa_setup_drmem_lmb);
> + walk_drmem_lmbs(memory, NULL, numa_setup_drmem_lmb);
Similarly here. Now that this call can fail, should
parse_numa_properties() handle or propagate the failure?
> of_node_put(memory);
> }
>
--
Thiago Jung Bauermann
IBM Linux Technology Center
Powered by blists - more mailing lists