[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <ZVMxpXBrE4p3IqhU@MiWiFi-R3L-srv>
Date: Tue, 14 Nov 2023 16:36:53 +0800
From: Baoquan He <bhe@...hat.com>
To: Yuntao Wang <ytcoode@...il.com>
Cc: alexander.shishkin@...ux.intel.com, bp@...en8.de,
dave.hansen@...ux.intel.com, hpa@...or.com, jgross@...e.com,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, mingo@...hat.com,
peterz@...radead.org, ssengar@...ux.microsoft.com,
tglx@...utronix.de, x86@...nel.org,
Andy Lutomirski <luto@...nel.org>,
Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] x86/setup: Use a more concise memblock API
On 11/14/23 at 03:37pm, Yuntao Wang wrote:
> When executing relocate_initrd()/numa_emulation()/numa_alloc_distance(),
> the memblock.current_limit field has already been set to
> `max_pfn_mapped << PAGE_SHIFT`, therefore we can replace
> memblock_phys_alloc_range() with memblock_phys_alloc(), which has the same
> functionality but is more concise.
>
> Signed-off-by: Yuntao Wang <ytcoode@...il.com>
> ---
> v1 -> v2:
>
> Also replace memblock_phys_alloc_range() in numa_emulation() and
> numa_alloc_distance() with memblock_phys_alloc()
LGTM,
Reviewed-by: Baoquan He <bhe@...hat.com>
>
> arch/x86/kernel/setup.c | 3 +--
> arch/x86/mm/numa.c | 3 +--
> arch/x86/mm/numa_emulation.c | 3 +--
> 3 files changed, 3 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/arch/x86/kernel/setup.c b/arch/x86/kernel/setup.c
> index ec2c21a1844e..422497c17eec 100644
> --- a/arch/x86/kernel/setup.c
> +++ b/arch/x86/kernel/setup.c
> @@ -259,8 +259,7 @@ static void __init relocate_initrd(void)
> u64 area_size = PAGE_ALIGN(ramdisk_size);
>
> /* We need to move the initrd down into directly mapped mem */
> - u64 relocated_ramdisk = memblock_phys_alloc_range(area_size, PAGE_SIZE, 0,
> - PFN_PHYS(max_pfn_mapped));
> + u64 relocated_ramdisk = memblock_phys_alloc(area_size, PAGE_SIZE);
> if (!relocated_ramdisk)
> panic("Cannot find place for new RAMDISK of size %lld\n",
> ramdisk_size);
> diff --git a/arch/x86/mm/numa.c b/arch/x86/mm/numa.c
> index b29ceb19e46e..29cd8fc8ede1 100644
> --- a/arch/x86/mm/numa.c
> +++ b/arch/x86/mm/numa.c
> @@ -378,8 +378,7 @@ static int __init numa_alloc_distance(void)
> cnt++;
> size = cnt * cnt * sizeof(numa_distance[0]);
>
> - phys = memblock_phys_alloc_range(size, PAGE_SIZE, 0,
> - PFN_PHYS(max_pfn_mapped));
> + phys = memblock_phys_alloc(size, PAGE_SIZE);
> if (!phys) {
> pr_warn("Warning: can't allocate distance table!\n");
> /* don't retry until explicitly reset */
> diff --git a/arch/x86/mm/numa_emulation.c b/arch/x86/mm/numa_emulation.c
> index 9a9305367fdd..8acb8d0f7d0f 100644
> --- a/arch/x86/mm/numa_emulation.c
> +++ b/arch/x86/mm/numa_emulation.c
> @@ -447,8 +447,7 @@ void __init numa_emulation(struct numa_meminfo *numa_meminfo, int numa_dist_cnt)
> if (numa_dist_cnt) {
> u64 phys;
>
> - phys = memblock_phys_alloc_range(phys_size, PAGE_SIZE, 0,
> - PFN_PHYS(max_pfn_mapped));
> + phys = memblock_phys_alloc(phys_size, PAGE_SIZE);
> if (!phys) {
> pr_warn("NUMA: Warning: can't allocate copy of distance table, disabling emulation\n");
> goto no_emu;
> --
> 2.42.1
>
Powered by blists - more mailing lists