On 16.01.2023 10:20, Wei Chen wrote:
> Hi Jan,
>
> On 2023/1/12 16:08, Jan Beulich wrote:
>> On 12.01.2023 07:22, Wei Chen wrote:
>>>> -----Original Message-----
>>>> From: Jan Beulich <jbeul...@suse.com>
>>>> Sent: 2023年1月11日 0:38
>>>>
>>>> On 10.01.2023 09:49, Wei Chen wrote:
>>>>> --- a/xen/arch/arm/include/asm/numa.h
>>>>> +++ b/xen/arch/arm/include/asm/numa.h
>>>>> @@ -22,6 +22,12 @@ typedef u8 nodeid_t;
>>>>> */
>>>>> #define NR_NODE_MEMBLKS NR_MEM_BANKS
>>>>>
>>>>> +enum dt_numa_status {
>>>>> + DT_NUMA_INIT,
>>>>
>>>> I don't see any use of this. I also think the name isn't good, as INIT
>>>> can be taken for "initializer" as well as "initialized". Suggesting an
>>>> alternative would require knowing what the future plans with this are;
>>>> right now ...
>>>>
>>>
>>> static enum dt_numa_status __read_mostly device_tree_numa;
>>
>> There's no DT_NUMA_INIT here. You _imply_ it having a value of zero.
>>
>
> How about I assign device_tree_numa explicitly like:
> ... __read_mostly device_tree_numa = DT_NUMA_UNINIT;
Well, yes, this is what I was asking for when mentioning the lack of use
of the enumerator. Irrespective of that I remain unhappy with the name,
though.
Jan
