On Thu, 2015-03-05 at 13:16 -0800, David Rientjes wrote:
> On Thu, 5 Mar 2015, Nishanth Aravamudan wrote:
>
> > diff --git a/arch/powerpc/mm/numa.c b/arch/powerpc/mm/numa.c
> > index 0257a7d659ef..24de29b3651b 100644
> > --- a/arch/powerpc/mm/numa.c
> > +++ b/arch/powerpc/mm/numa.c
> > @@ -958,9 +958,17 @@ void __init initmem_init(void)
> >
> > memblock_dump_all();
> >
> > + /*
> > + * zero out the possible nodes after we parse the device-tree,
> > + * so that we lower the maximum NUMA node ID to what is actually
> > + * present.
> > + */
> > + nodes_clear(node_possible_map);
> > +
> > for_each_online_node(nid) {
> > unsigned long start_pfn, end_pfn;
> >
> > + node_set(nid, node_possible_map);
> > get_pfn_range_for_nid(nid, &start_pfn, &end_pfn);
> > setup_node_data(nid, start_pfn, end_pfn);
> > sparse_memory_present_with_active_regions(nid);
>
> This seems a bit strange, node_possible_map is supposed to be a superset
> of node_online_map and this loop is iterating over node_online_map to set
> nodes in node_possible_map.
Yeah. Though at this point in boot I don't think it matters that the two maps
are out-of-sync temporarily.
But it would simpler to just set the possible map to be the online map. That
would also maintain the invariant that the possible map is always a superset of
the online map.
Or did I miss a detail there (sleep deprived parent mode).
cheers
_______________________________________________
Linuxppc-dev mailing list
Linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org
https://lists.ozlabs.org/listinfo/linuxppc-dev
