During fakenuma processing in numa_emulation(), pi gets passed in and
processed as new fake numa nodes are being split out. Once the original
memory region is proccessed, it gets removed from the pi by
numa_remove_memblk_from() in emu_setup_memblk(). So entry 0 gets deleted
and the rest of the entries get moved up. Therefore we should always pass
in entry 0 for the next entry to process.
Fixes: 1f6a2c6d9f121 ("x86/numa_emulation: Introduce uniform split
capability")
Cc: Dan Williams <dan.j.willi...@intel.com>
Signed-off-by: Dave Jiang <dave.ji...@intel.com>
Reviewed-by: Dan Williams <dan.j.willi...@intel.com>
---
V2:
- Add comment for the code change (Dan)
arch/x86/mm/numa_emulation.c | 12 ++++++++++--
1 file changed, 10 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
diff --git a/arch/x86/mm/numa_emulation.c b/arch/x86/mm/numa_emulation.c
index b54d52a2d00a..d71d72cf6c66 100644
--- a/arch/x86/mm/numa_emulation.c
+++ b/arch/x86/mm/numa_emulation.c
@@ -400,9 +400,17 @@ void __init numa_emulation(struct numa_meminfo
*numa_meminfo, int numa_dist_cnt)
n = simple_strtoul(emu_cmdline, &emu_cmdline, 0);
ret = -1;
for_each_node_mask(i, physnode_mask) {
+ /*
+ * The reason we pass in blk[0] is due to
+ * numa_remove_memblk_from() called by
+ * emu_setup_memblk() will delete entry 0
+ * and then move everything else up in the pi.blk
+ * array. Therefore we should always be looking
+ * at blk[0].
+ */
ret = split_nodes_size_interleave_uniform(&ei, &pi,
- pi.blk[i].start, pi.blk[i].end, 0,
- n, &pi.blk[i], nid);
+ pi.blk[0].start, pi.blk[0].end, 0,
+ n, &pi.blk[0], nid);
if (ret < 0)
break;
if (ret < n) {
