From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1755564Ab3BEBMg (ORCPT ); Mon, 4 Feb 2013 20:12:36 -0500 Received: from cn.fujitsu.com ([222.73.24.84]:54173 "EHLO song.cn.fujitsu.com" rhost-flags-OK-FAIL-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1754542Ab3BEBMf convert rfc822-to-8bit (ORCPT ); Mon, 4 Feb 2013 20:12:35 -0500 X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.84,603,1355068800"; d="scan'208";a="6688691" Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/5] acpi/numa: check if parsing acpi numa info disabled earlier From: li guang To: David Rientjes Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org, x86@kernel.org In-Reply-To: References: <1359967426-32629-1-git-send-email-lig.fnst@cn.fujitsu.com> <1359967426-32629-3-git-send-email-lig.fnst@cn.fujitsu.com> Date: Tue, 05 Feb 2013 09:12:18 +0800 Message-ID: <1360026738.4449.8.camel@liguang.fnst.cn.fujitsu.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Evolution 2.30.3 X-MIMETrack: Itemize by SMTP Server on mailserver/fnst(Release 8.5.3|September 15, 2011) at 2013/02/05 09:11:16, Serialize by Router on mailserver/fnst(Release 8.5.3|September 15, 2011) at 2013/02/05 09:11:17, Serialize complete at 2013/02/05 09:11:17 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8BIT Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org 在 2013-02-04一的 11:41 -0800，David Rientjes写道： > On Mon, 4 Feb 2013, liguang wrote: > > > Signed-off-by: liguang > > Because there's no changelog, I have to read the patch to figure out what > it's doing since the title isn't that helpful either. Please provide a > description of what problem you're trying to fix or what improvement > you're trying to make so it's clear. > > > --- > > arch/x86/mm/srat.c | 6 ------ > > drivers/acpi/numa.c | 2 ++ > > 2 files changed, 2 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-) > > > > diff --git a/arch/x86/mm/srat.c b/arch/x86/mm/srat.c > > index a837c95..78c67bd 100644 > > --- a/arch/x86/mm/srat.c > > +++ b/arch/x86/mm/srat.c > > @@ -60,8 +60,6 @@ acpi_numa_x2apic_affinity_init(struct acpi_srat_x2apic_cpu_affinity *pa) > > int pxm, node; > > int apic_id; > > > > - if (srat_disabled()) > > - return; > > if (pa->header.length < sizeof(struct acpi_srat_x2apic_cpu_affinity)) { > > bad_srat(); > > return; > > @@ -100,8 +98,6 @@ acpi_numa_processor_affinity_init(struct acpi_srat_cpu_affinity *pa) > > int pxm, node; > > int apic_id; > > > > - if (srat_disabled()) > > - return; > > if (pa->header.length != sizeof(struct acpi_srat_cpu_affinity)) { > > bad_srat(); > > return; > > @@ -148,8 +144,6 @@ acpi_numa_memory_affinity_init(struct acpi_srat_mem_affinity *ma) > > u64 start, end; > > int node, pxm; > > > > - if (srat_disabled()) > > - return -1; > > if (ma->header.length != sizeof(struct acpi_srat_mem_affinity)) { > > bad_srat(); > > return -1; > > diff --git a/drivers/acpi/numa.c b/drivers/acpi/numa.c > > index cb31298..1f51222 100644 > > --- a/drivers/acpi/numa.c > > +++ b/drivers/acpi/numa.c > > @@ -262,6 +262,8 @@ static int __init acpi_parse_srat(struct acpi_table_header *table) > > struct acpi_table_srat *srat; > > if (!table) > > return -EINVAL; > > + if (srat_disabled()) > > + return -EACCES; > > > > srat = (struct acpi_table_srat *)table; > > acpi_srat_revision = srat->header.revision; > > Nack, this isn't helpful since SRAT is only for x86 and other > architectures use this code. It would break the build on ia64 since it's > obviously not going to have a function called srat_disabled(). > > And -EACCES would not be the appropriate return value, this has nothing to > do with permissions. Yes, you're right, will drop this change.