Re: [PATCH] arm64, pci, numa: Adding helper functions as required by pci

From: Ganapatrao Kulkarni
Date: Mon Jan 11 2016 - 12:27:08 EST


Hi Bjorn, Will,

On Mon, Jan 11, 2016 at 10:42 PM, Matthias Brugger <mbrugger@xxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
>
> On 09/01/16 16:35, Ganapatrao Kulkarni wrote:
>>
>> Hi Bjorn,
>>
>> On Sat, Jan 9, 2016 at 8:54 PM, Bjorn Helgaas <helgaas@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>>>
>>> On Sat, Jan 09, 2016 at 11:35:17AM +0530, Ganapatrao Kulkarni wrote:
>>>>
>>>> On Fri, Jan 8, 2016 at 11:36 PM, Will Deacon <will.deacon@xxxxxxx>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> On Fri, Jan 08, 2016 at 12:01:31PM -0600, Bjorn Helgaas wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On Tue, Dec 22, 2015 at 04:08:50PM +0530, Ganapatrao Kulkarni wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Adding helper functions and necessary code to make
>>>>>>> pci driver(pci-host-generic) numa aware.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> This patch is on top of arm64-numa v7.
>>>>>>> http://www.spinics.net/lists/arm-kernel/msg460813.html
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Signed-off-by: Ganapatrao Kulkarni <gkulkarni@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>>>>>>> ---
>>>>>>> arch/arm64/include/asm/numa.h | 8 +++++---
>>>>>>> arch/arm64/kernel/pci.c | 8 ++++++++
>>>>>>> drivers/pci/host/pci-host-generic.c | 1 +
>
>
> set_dev_node() in pci-host-generic.c is missing in v8 of your numa patches.
> Was this forgotten?
i am not sure on adding numa required change(it is one line add) to
pci-host-generic.c in numa patchset itself.
Is it more appropriate to send as separate patch?
please suggest.


Thanks Matthias for your comment.
>
> Regards,
> Matthias
>
>>>>>>> 3 files changed, 14 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> diff --git a/arch/arm64/include/asm/numa.h
>>>>>>> b/arch/arm64/include/asm/numa.h
>>>>>>> index b8c2a3f..1eca4db 100644
>>>>>>> --- a/arch/arm64/include/asm/numa.h
>>>>>>> +++ b/arch/arm64/include/asm/numa.h
>>>>>>> @@ -15,9 +15,11 @@
>>>>>>> extern int __node_distance(int from, int to);
>>>>>>> #define node_distance(a, b) __node_distance(a, b)
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> -/* dummy definitions for pci functions */
>>>>>>> -#define pcibus_to_node(node) 0
>>>>>>> -#define cpumask_of_pcibus(bus) 0
>>>>>>> +struct pci_bus;
>>>>>>> +extern int pcibus_to_node(struct pci_bus *bus);
>>>>>>> +#define cpumask_of_pcibus(bus) (pcibus_to_node(bus) == -1 ?
>>>>>>> \
>>>>>>> + cpu_all_mask : \
>>>>>>> + cpumask_of_node(pcibus_to_node(bus)))
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> All the arch definitions of cpumask_of_pcibus() are pretty similar;
>>>>>> could they be made more generic? At the very least, can you drop the
>>>>>> definition here and use the one in include/asm-generic/topology.h,
>>>>>> which is identical to what you're defining here?
>>>>
>>>> macro cpumask_of_pcibus is defined under #ifndef CONFIG_NUMA in
>>>> include/asm-generic/topology.h
>>>> and this macro is defined again for NUMA in respective arch header
>>>> files.
>>>> i think moving this macro from ifndef will allow us to use without
>>>> redefinition.
>>>>
>>>> --- a/include/asm-generic/topology.h
>>>> +++ b/include/asm-generic/topology.h
>>>> @@ -54,14 +54,14 @@
>>>> #define pcibus_to_node(bus) ((void)(bus), -1)
>>>> #endif
>>>>
>>>> +#endif /* CONFIG_NUMA */
>>>> +
>>>> #ifndef cpumask_of_pcibus
>>>> #define cpumask_of_pcibus(bus) (pcibus_to_node(bus) == -1 ?
>>>> \
>>>> cpu_all_mask :
>>>> \
>>>> cpumask_of_node(pcibus_to_node(bus)))
>>>> #endif
>>>>
>>>> -#endif /* CONFIG_NUMA */
>>>> -
>>>> #if !defined(CONFIG_NUMA) || !defined(CONFIG_HAVE_MEMORYLESS_NODES)
>>>>
>>>> #ifndef set_numa_mem
>>>>
>>>> i have got below compilation error withour macro defined in arch code.
>>>>
>>>> drivers/pci/pci-sysfs.c: In function âcpuaffinity_showâ:
>>>> drivers/pci/pci-sysfs.c:114:15: error: implicit declaration of
>>>> function âcpumask_of_pcibusâ [-Werror=implicit-function-declaration]
>>>> drivers/pci/pci-sysfs.c:114:34: warning: initialization makes pointer
>>>> from integer without a cast [enabled by default]
>>>> drivers/pci/pci-sysfs.c: In function âcpulistaffinity_showâ:
>>>> drivers/pci/pci-sysfs.c:123:34: warning: initialization makes pointer
>>>> from integer without a cast [enabled by default]
>>>> cc1: some warnings being treated as errors
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> i can send this as separate patch( as a fix patch).
>>>
>>>
>>> Unless your series has already been merged, I don't like the idea of a
>>> separate fix patch. The whole point of reviews is to try to fix as
>>> many things as we can *before* merging.
>>
>> thanks for the review.
>> sure, i will add this as part of my numa patch series.
>>>
>>>
>>> Bjorn
>>
>>
>> thanks
>> Ganapat
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> linux-arm-kernel mailing list
>> linux-arm-kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>> http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel
>>
>