linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v2 2/4 RESEND] MIPS: Loongson64: Clean up numa.c

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]

Date:   Mon, 12 Oct 2020 12:35:15 +0200
From:   Thomas Bogendoerfer <tsbogend@...ha.franken.de>
To:     Tiezhu Yang <yangtiezhu@...ngson.cn>
Cc:     Jonathan Corbet <corbet@....net>, Huacai Chen <chenhc@...ote.com>,
        Jiaxun Yang <jiaxun.yang@...goat.com>,
        linux-mips@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-doc@...r.kernel.org, Xuefeng Li <lixuefeng@...ngson.cn>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 2/4 RESEND] MIPS: Loongson64: Clean up numa.c

On Sun, Oct 11, 2020 at 07:47:52AM +0800, Tiezhu Yang wrote:
> (1) Replace nid_to_addroffset() with nid_to_addrbase() and then remove the
> related useless code.
> 
> (2) Since end_pfn = start_pfn + node_psize, use "node_psize" instead of
> "end_pfn - start_pfn" to avoid the redundant calculation.
> 
> (3) After commit 6fbde6b492df ("MIPS: Loongson64: Move files to the
> top-level directory"), CONFIG_ZONE_DMA32 is always set for Loongson64
> due to MACH_LOONGSON64 selects ZONE_DMA32, so no need to use ifdef any
> more, just remove it.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Tiezhu Yang <yangtiezhu@...ngson.cn>
> Reviewed-by: Jiaxun Yang <jiaxun.yang@...goat.com>
> ---
> 
> v2: no changes, just add Reviewed-by tag
> 
>  arch/mips/include/asm/mach-loongson64/mmzone.h |  6 +-----
>  arch/mips/loongson64/numa.c                    | 29 +++-----------------------
>  2 files changed, 4 insertions(+), 31 deletions(-)

applied to mips-next.

Thomas.

-- 
Crap can work. Given enough thrust pigs will fly, but it's not necessarily a
good idea.                                                [ RFC1925, 2.3 ]