Russell King wrote:
> On Thu, Oct 24, 2002 at 05:38:22PM -0700, Matthew Dobson wrote:
>
>>Anyone who is more familiar with some of the architectures I mucked with
>>(arm, alpha, ppc64), please let me know if what I've done looks wrong.
>
> Well, this breaks ARM. ARM needs MAX_NR_NODES even for the non-discontig
> mem case. Also, I really don't like the idea of re-using param.h for
> something else - if its going to hoover up random constants, then its
> going to create the usual mess, where if you change one constant that's
> used in 1% of files, 100% of files gets rebuilt.
Hmmm... MAX_NR_NODES is *definitely* available in the non-discontig
case. In include/linux/param.h, MAX_NR_NODES (ifndef'd) is defined to
be 1. This is the generic case. linux/param.h first includes
asm/param.h, so the architecture has the chance to define MAX_NR_NODES
as appropriate for the specific arch. Also, for clps711x and sa1100,
MAX_NR_NODES is defined to be 4, as it NR_NODES was before the change.
Are you sure this is really broken? Have you tried out the patch? I'd
do it myself, but I don't have any access to appropriate machines.
> That is why arm has asm/memory.h to contain everything related to memory
> translation and discontig memory.
This isn't *just* a discontig change. CONFIG_DISCONTIGMEM is a
convenient option to key off of, but as the kernel becomes more and more
NUMA aware, the number of nodes in the system becomes a useful bit of
information to more and more of the code. *That* is why (along with a
suggestion from wli) I put the #defines in param.h.
> It would be better if it remained in mmzone.h for non-arm, and the
> memory.h files for arm. I really never understood why numnodes.h was
> created when mmzone.h has works adequately well since 2.3.
The entire point of this patch is to make this sort of thing *more*
consistent. If this is really that bad for arm, then we can just forget
the patch. I have no desire to increase the complexity of this, or at
best keep it the same. As mentioned in the original post, I was trying
to kill a bunch of (seemingly) unnecessary .h files (the numnodes.h's
specifically), and remove the MAX_[NUM|NR_]NODES duality. If that can't
be accomplished, then all this would do is move the confusion around,
and I don't want that...
If you feel param.h is the wrong place, I originally had the #define's
in asm/topology.h. I feel that is also an appropriate place, exists for
every architecture, and my second choice. I could fairly easily retool
the patch to use that if that is decided to be more appropriate.
If you could give the patch a second read-through, noting the points in
my first paragraph, I would really appreciate it. If you still think
it's broken, we can try and work out how to fix it, or we can drop it.
Cheers!
-Matt
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Thu Oct 31 2002 - 22:00:39 EST