RE: [PATCH v2 1/3] arm64/numa: export memory_add_physaddr_to_nid as EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL

From: Justin He
Date: Tue Jul 07 2020 - 22:20:43 EST


Hi Michal and David

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Michal Hocko <mhocko@xxxxxxxxxx>
> Sent: Tuesday, July 7, 2020 7:55 PM
> To: Justin He <Justin.He@xxxxxxx>
> Cc: Catalin Marinas <Catalin.Marinas@xxxxxxx>; Will Deacon
> <will@xxxxxxxxxx>; Dan Williams <dan.j.williams@xxxxxxxxx>; Vishal Verma
> <vishal.l.verma@xxxxxxxxx>; Dave Jiang <dave.jiang@xxxxxxxxx>; Andrew
> Morton <akpm@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>; Mike Rapoport <rppt@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>;
> Baoquan He <bhe@xxxxxxxxxx>; Chuhong Yuan <hslester96@xxxxxxxxx>; linux-
> arm-kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; linux-kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; linux-
> mm@xxxxxxxxx; linux-nvdimm@xxxxxxxxxxxx; Kaly Xin <Kaly.Xin@xxxxxxx>
> Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 1/3] arm64/numa: export memory_add_physaddr_to_nid
> as EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL
>
> On Tue 07-07-20 13:59:15, Jia He wrote:
> > This exports memory_add_physaddr_to_nid() for module driver to use.
> >
> > memory_add_physaddr_to_nid() is a fallback option to get the nid in case
> > NUMA_NO_NID is detected.
> >
> > Suggested-by: David Hildenbrand <david@xxxxxxxxxx>
> > Signed-off-by: Jia He <justin.he@xxxxxxx>
> > ---
> > arch/arm64/mm/numa.c | 5 +++--
> > 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/arch/arm64/mm/numa.c b/arch/arm64/mm/numa.c
> > index aafcee3e3f7e..7eeb31740248 100644
> > --- a/arch/arm64/mm/numa.c
> > +++ b/arch/arm64/mm/numa.c
> > @@ -464,10 +464,11 @@ void __init arm64_numa_init(void)
> >
> > /*
> > * We hope that we will be hotplugging memory on nodes we already know
> about,
> > - * such that acpi_get_node() succeeds and we never fall back to this...
> > + * such that acpi_get_node() succeeds. But when SRAT is not present,
> the node
> > + * id may be probed as NUMA_NO_NODE by acpi, Here provide a fallback
> option.
> > */
> > int memory_add_physaddr_to_nid(u64 addr)
> > {
> > - pr_warn("Unknown node for memory at 0x%llx, assuming node 0\n",
> addr);
> > return 0;
> > }
> > +EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(memory_add_physaddr_to_nid);
>
> Does it make sense to export a noop function? Wouldn't make more sense
> to simply make it static inline somewhere in a header? I haven't checked
> whether there is an easy way to do that sanely bu this just hit my eyes.

Okay, I can make a change in memory_hotplug.h, sth like:
--- a/include/linux/memory_hotplug.h
+++ b/include/linux/memory_hotplug.h
@@ -149,13 +149,13 @@ int add_pages(int nid, unsigned long start_pfn, unsigned long nr_pages,
struct mhp_params *params);
#endif /* ARCH_HAS_ADD_PAGES */

-#ifdef CONFIG_NUMA
-extern int memory_add_physaddr_to_nid(u64 start);
-#else
+#if !defined(CONFIG_NUMA) || !defined(memory_add_physaddr_to_nid)
static inline int memory_add_physaddr_to_nid(u64 start)
{
return 0;
}
+#else
+extern int memory_add_physaddr_to_nid(u64 start);
#endif

And then check the memory_add_physaddr_to_nid() helper on all arches,
if it is noop(return 0), I can simply remove it.
if it is not noop, after the helper,
#define memory_add_physaddr_to_nid

What do you think of this proposal?

--
Cheers,
Justin (Jia He)