[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [XEN RFC PATCH 22/40] xen/arm: introduce a helper to parse device tree processor node





On 23/08/2021 09:47, Wei Chen wrote:
Hi Julien,

Hi Wei,

-----Original Message-----
From: Julien Grall <julien@xxxxxxx>
Sent: 2021年8月20日 2:11
To: Wei Chen <Wei.Chen@xxxxxxx>; xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx;
sstabellini@xxxxxxxxxx; jbeulich@xxxxxxxx
Cc: Bertrand Marquis <Bertrand.Marquis@xxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: [XEN RFC PATCH 22/40] xen/arm: introduce a helper to parse
device tree processor node

On 11/08/2021 11:24, Wei Chen wrote:
Processor NUMA ID information is stored in device tree's processor
node as "numa-node-id". We need a new helper to parse this ID from
processor node. If we get this ID from processor node, this ID's
validity still need to be checked. Once we got a invalid NUMA ID
from any processor node, the device tree will be marked as NUMA
information invalid.

Signed-off-by: Wei Chen <wei.chen@xxxxxxx>
---
   xen/arch/arm/numa_device_tree.c | 41 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++--
   1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)

diff --git a/xen/arch/arm/numa_device_tree.c
b/xen/arch/arm/numa_device_tree.c
index 1c74ad135d..37cc56acf3 100644
--- a/xen/arch/arm/numa_device_tree.c
+++ b/xen/arch/arm/numa_device_tree.c
@@ -20,16 +20,53 @@
   #include <xen/init.h>
   #include <xen/nodemask.h>
   #include <xen/numa.h>
+#include <xen/device_tree.h>
+#include <asm/setup.h>

   s8 device_tree_numa = 0;
+static nodemask_t processor_nodes_parsed __initdata;

-int srat_disabled(void)
+static int srat_disabled(void)
   {
       return numa_off || device_tree_numa < 0;
   }

-void __init bad_srat(void)
+static __init void bad_srat(void)
   {
       printk(KERN_ERR "DT: NUMA information is not used.\n");
       device_tree_numa = -1;
   }
+
+/* Callback for device tree processor affinity */
+static int __init dtb_numa_processor_affinity_init(nodeid_t node)

I forgot to answer. It seems odd that some of the function names start
with dtb_* while other starts device_tree_*. Any particular reason for
that difference of naming?


yes, in the very beginning, I want to keep device_tree_ prefix for
functions that will handle dtb file. And use dtb_ prefix to replace
acpi, to indicate, this function is device tree version numa implementation.

Thanks for the clarification. The difference between "dtb" and "device_tree" is quite subttle: the former refers to the binary while the latter refers to the format. Most of the readers are likely to infer they mean the same. So I think this will bring more confusion.


If that's not the right reason, I will unify all prefix to device_tree_
in next version. How do you think about it?

AFAICT, your parsing functions will always start with "device_tree_parse_". I would prefer if the set replacing the ACPI helpers start with "device_tree_".

If you are concern with the length of the function name, then I would suggest to prefix all the functions with "fdt" (We are dealing with the flattened DT after all) or "dt".

Cheers,

--
Julien Grall



 


Rackspace

Lists.xenproject.org is hosted with RackSpace, monitoring our
servers 24x7x365 and backed by RackSpace's Fanatical Support®.