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

[David Rientjes]

On Fri, 4 Mar 2011, Cyrill Gorcunov 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?
> 

Not sure what you mean.  "ret" is a temporary variable to test the return 
values of numa_init() and return from initmem_init() on success.
--
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/