From 474aeffd88b87746a75583f356183d5c6caa4213 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Wei Yang Date: Tue, 14 Mar 2017 11:08:01 +0800 Subject: [PATCH] x86/mm/numa: Remove numa_nodemask_from_meminfo() numa_nodemask_from_meminfo() generates a nodemask of nodes which have memory according to a meminfo descriptor. The two callsites of that function both set bits in copies of the numa_nodes_parsed nodemask. In both cases, the information in supplied numa_meminfo is a subset of numa_nodes_parsed. So setting those bits again is not really necessary. Here are the three call paths which show that the supplied numa_meminfo argument describes memory regions in nodes which are already in numa_nodes_parsed: x86_numa_init() numa_init() Case 1: acpi_numa_init() acpi_parse_memory_affinity() numa_add_memblk() node_set(numa_nodes_parsed) acpi_parse_slit() acpi_numa_slit_init() numa_set_distance() numa_alloc_distance() numa_nodemask_from_meminfo() Case 2: amd_numa_init() numa_add_memblk() node_set(numa_nodes_parsed) Case 3 dummy_numa_init() node_set(numa_nodes_parsed) numa_add_memblk() numa_register_memblks() numa_nodemask_from_meminfo() Thus, in all three cases, the respective bit in numa_nodes_parsed is set, which means it is not necessary to set it again in a copy of numa_nodes_parsed. So remove that function. Signed-off-by: Wei Yang Cc: x86-ml Link: http://lkml.kernel.org/r/20170314030801.13656-2-richard.weiyang@gmail.com [ Heavily massage commit message. ] Signed-off-by: Borislav Petkov Signed-off-by: Thomas Gleixner --- arch/x86/mm/numa.c | 21 +-------------------- 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 20 deletions(-) diff --git a/arch/x86/mm/numa.c b/arch/x86/mm/numa.c index 93671d8b3b0d..175f54ac6772 100644 --- a/arch/x86/mm/numa.c +++ b/arch/x86/mm/numa.c @@ -314,20 +314,6 @@ int __init numa_cleanup_meminfo(struct numa_meminfo *mi) return 0; } -/* - * Set nodes, which have memory in @mi, in *@nodemask. - */ -static void __init numa_nodemask_from_meminfo(nodemask_t *nodemask, - const struct numa_meminfo *mi) -{ - int i; - - for (i = 0; i < ARRAY_SIZE(mi->blk); i++) - if (mi->blk[i].start != mi->blk[i].end && - mi->blk[i].nid != NUMA_NO_NODE) - node_set(mi->blk[i].nid, *nodemask); -} - /** * numa_reset_distance - Reset NUMA distance table * @@ -347,16 +333,12 @@ void __init numa_reset_distance(void) static int __init numa_alloc_distance(void) { - nodemask_t nodes_parsed; size_t size; int i, j, cnt = 0; u64 phys; /* size the new table and allocate it */ - nodes_parsed = numa_nodes_parsed; - numa_nodemask_from_meminfo(&nodes_parsed, &numa_meminfo); - - for_each_node_mask(i, nodes_parsed) + for_each_node_mask(i, numa_nodes_parsed) cnt = i; cnt++; size = cnt * cnt * sizeof(numa_distance[0]); @@ -535,7 +517,6 @@ static int __init numa_register_memblks(struct numa_meminfo *mi) /* Account for nodes with cpus and no memory */ node_possible_map = numa_nodes_parsed; - numa_nodemask_from_meminfo(&node_possible_map, mi); if (WARN_ON(nodes_empty(node_possible_map))) return -EINVAL; -- 2.39.5