[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <ZJkudvnGz+Tt5Qml@kernel.org>
Date: Mon, 26 Jun 2023 09:21:42 +0300
From: Mike Rapoport <rppt@...nel.org>
To: Yajun Deng <yajun.deng@...ux.dev>
Cc: akpm@...ux-foundation.org, linux-mm@...ck.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] memblock: Introduce memblock_reserve_node()
On Sun, Jun 25, 2023 at 07:39:10AM +0000, Yajun Deng wrote:
> June 25, 2023 1:08 PM, "Mike Rapoport" <rppt@...nel.org> wrote:
>
> > On Sat, Jun 24, 2023 at 10:46:22AM +0800, Yajun Deng wrote:
> >
> >> It only returns address now in memblock_find_in_range_node(), we can add a
> >> parameter pointing to integer for node id of the range, which can be used
> >> to pass the node id to the new reserve region.
> >>
> >> Introduce memblock_reserve_node() so that the node id can be passed to
> >> the reserve region in memblock_alloc_range_nid().
> >>
> >> Signed-off-by: Yajun Deng <yajun.deng@...ux.dev>
> >
> > What problem does this patch solve?
> >
>
> If we set nid and flags in memblock_alloc_range_nid(), we may not need
> memblock_set_node() in memmap_init_reserved_pages().
When memblock_reserve() is called before NUMA setup, the node ids are still
unset in memblock.memory, so very early reservations will be missed and we
still have to update node ids in memblock.reserved later.
> I tested this patch and delete memblock_set_node() in memmap_init_reserved_pages().
> It works fine. I did not delete memblock_set_node() in this patch just in case.
--
Sincerely yours,
Mike.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists