Re: [patch] x86, mm: Clean up initmem_init

[Cyrill Gorcunov]

On 03/04/2011 12:15 AM, David Rientjes wrote:
> This patch cleans initmem_init() so that it is more readable and doesn't
> use an unnecessary array of function pointers to convolute the flow of
> the code.  It also makes it obvious that dummy_numa_init() will always
> succeed (and documents that requirement) so that the existing BUG() is
> never actually reached.
> 
> No functional change.
> 
> Signed-off-by: David Rientjes <rientjes@xxxxxxxxxx>
> ---
>  arch/x86/mm/numa_64.c |   92 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++---------------------
>  1 files changed, 53 insertions(+), 39 deletions(-)
> 
...
> +void __init initmem_init(void)
> +{
> +	int ret;
>  
> -			if (nid == NUMA_NO_NODE)
> -				continue;
> -			if (!node_online(nid))
> -				numa_clear_node(j);
> -		}
> -		numa_init_array();
> -		return;
> +	if (!numa_off) {
> +#ifdef CONFIG_ACPI_NUMA
> +		ret = numa_init(x86_acpi_numa_init);
> +		if (!ret)
> +			return;
> +#endif
> +#ifdef CONFIG_AMD_NUMA
> +		ret = numa_init(amd_numa_init);
> +		if (!ret)
> +			return;
> +#endif
>  	}
> -	BUG();
> +
> +	numa_init(dummy_numa_init);
>  }
>  
>  unsigned long __init numa_free_all_bootmem(void)

Divid, I suspect it's due to diff format and we still need "ret" here, right?

-- 
    Cyrill
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/