On Tue, 2009-09-01 at 19:57 +0530, Balbir Singh wrote:
> >
> > Heres the updated patch:
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Ankita Garg <ank...@in.ibm.com>
The thread is too messy. Please Ankita can you re-submit in proper
form (ie. subject, cset, signed-off & patch) please ?
In general, don't mix reply to comments and new patch submission,
or patchwork gets really confuse. Post a new name, with something
like [PATCH v2] <name of the patch> in the subject.
Thanks.
Cheers,
Ben.
> > Index: linux-2.6.31-rc5/arch/powerpc/mm/numa.c
> > ===================================================================
> > --- linux-2.6.31-rc5.orig/arch/powerpc/mm/numa.c
> > +++ linux-2.6.31-rc5/arch/powerpc/mm/numa.c
> > @@ -26,6 +26,13 @@
> > #include <asm/smp.h>
> >
> > static int numa_enabled = 1;
> > +static int fake_enabled = 1;
> > +
> > +/*
> > + * The array maps a real numa node to the first fake node that gets
> > + * created on it
> > + */
> > +int fake_numa_node_mapping[MAX_NUMNODES];
> >
> > static char *cmdline __initdata;
> >
> > @@ -49,14 +56,29 @@ static int __cpuinit fake_numa_create_ne
> > unsigned long long mem;
> > char *p = cmdline;
> > static unsigned int fake_nid;
> > + static unsigned int prev_nid = 0;
> > static unsigned long long curr_boundary;
> >
> > /*
> > * Modify node id, iff we started creating NUMA nodes
> > * We want to continue from where we left of the last time
> > */
> > - if (fake_nid)
> > + if (fake_nid) {
> > + /*
> > + * Moved over to the next real numa node, increment fake
> > + * node number and store the mapping of the real node to
> > + * the fake node
> > + */
> > + if (prev_nid != *nid) {
> > + fake_nid++;
> > + fake_numa_node_mapping[*nid] = fake_nid;
> > + prev_nid = *nid;
> > + *nid = fake_nid;
> > + return 0;
> > + }
> > *nid = fake_nid;
> > + }
> > +
> > /*
> > * In case there are no more arguments to parse, the
> > * node_id should be the same as the last fake node id
> > @@ -440,7 +462,7 @@ static int of_drconf_to_nid_single(struc
> > */
> > static int __cpuinit numa_setup_cpu(unsigned long lcpu)
> > {
> > - int nid = 0;
> > + int nid = 0, new_nid;
> > struct device_node *cpu = of_get_cpu_node(lcpu, NULL);
> >
> > if (!cpu) {
> > @@ -450,8 +472,15 @@ static int __cpuinit numa_setup_cpu(unsi
> >
> > nid = of_node_to_nid_single(cpu);
> >
> > + if (fake_enabled && nid) {
> > + new_nid = fake_numa_node_mapping[nid];
> > + if (new_nid > 0)
> > + nid = new_nid;
> > + }
> > +
> > if (nid < 0 || !node_online(nid))
> > nid = any_online_node(NODE_MASK_ALL);
> > +
> > out:
> > map_cpu_to_node(lcpu, nid);
> >
> > @@ -1005,8 +1034,12 @@ static int __init early_numa(char *p)
> > numa_debug = 1;
> >
> > p = strstr(p, "fake=");
> > - if (p)
> > + if (p) {
> > cmdline = p + strlen("fake=");
> > + if (numa_enabled) {
> > + fake_enabled = 1;
> > + }
> > + }
> >
> > return 0;
> > }
> >
>
>
> Looks good to me
>
>
> Reviewed-by: Balbir Singh <bal...@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
>
>
>
_______________________________________________
Linuxppc-dev mailing list
Linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org
https://lists.ozlabs.org/listinfo/linuxppc-dev
