* Re: [PATCH v6] driver core: platform: set numa_node before platform_device_add()
2023-09-18 13:45 [PATCH v6] driver core: platform: set numa_node before platform_device_add() Jinhui Guo
@ 2023-09-18 14:34 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2023-09-18 15:17 ` Greg KH
` (3 subsequent siblings)
4 siblings, 0 replies; 6+ messages in thread
From: Rafael J. Wysocki @ 2023-09-18 14:34 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Jinhui Guo
Cc: rafael, lenb, gregkh, lizefan.x, linux-acpi, linux-kernel,
stable, kernel test robot
On Mon, Sep 18, 2023 at 3:46 PM Jinhui Guo <guojinhui.liam@bytedance.com> wrote:
>
> Setting the devices' numa_node needs to be done in
> platform_device_register_full(), because that's where the
> platform device object is allocated.
>
> Fixes: 4a60406d3592 ("driver core: platform: expose numa_node to users in sysfs")
> Cc: stable@vger.kernel.org
> Reported-by: kernel test robot <lkp@intel.com>
> Closes: https://lore.kernel.org/oe-kbuild-all/202309122309.mbxAnAIe-lkp@intel.com/
> Reviewed-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
> Reviewed-by: Rafael J. Wysocki <rafael@kernel.org>
No, I haven't given you this tag.
I don't think that Greg has given you the one above either.
Please don't add tage that you haven't received to your patches,
because they are not applicable with incorrect tags.
> Signed-off-by: Jinhui Guo <guojinhui.liam@bytedance.com>
> ---
> V5 -> V6:
> 1. Update subject to correct function name platform_device_add().
> 2. Provide a more clear and accurate description of the changes
> made in commit (suggested by Rafael J. Wysocki).
> 3. Add reviewer name.
>
> V4 -> V5:
> Add Cc: stable line and changes from the previous submited patches.
>
> V3 -> V4:
> Refactor code to be an ACPI function call.
>
> V2 -> V3:
> Fix Signed-off name.
>
> V1 -> V2:
> Fix compile error without enabling CONFIG_ACPI.
> ---
>
> drivers/acpi/acpi_platform.c | 4 +---
> drivers/base/platform.c | 1 +
> include/linux/acpi.h | 5 +++++
> 3 files changed, 7 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/acpi/acpi_platform.c b/drivers/acpi/acpi_platform.c
> index 48d15dd785f6..adcbfbdc343f 100644
> --- a/drivers/acpi/acpi_platform.c
> +++ b/drivers/acpi/acpi_platform.c
> @@ -178,11 +178,9 @@ struct platform_device *acpi_create_platform_device(struct acpi_device *adev,
> if (IS_ERR(pdev))
> dev_err(&adev->dev, "platform device creation failed: %ld\n",
> PTR_ERR(pdev));
> - else {
> - set_dev_node(&pdev->dev, acpi_get_node(adev->handle));
> + else
> dev_dbg(&adev->dev, "created platform device %s\n",
> dev_name(&pdev->dev));
> - }
>
> kfree(resources);
>
> diff --git a/drivers/base/platform.c b/drivers/base/platform.c
> index 76bfcba25003..35c891075d95 100644
> --- a/drivers/base/platform.c
> +++ b/drivers/base/platform.c
> @@ -841,6 +841,7 @@ struct platform_device *platform_device_register_full(
> goto err;
> }
>
> + set_dev_node(&pdev->dev, ACPI_NODE_GET(ACPI_COMPANION(&pdev->dev)));
> ret = platform_device_add(pdev);
> if (ret) {
> err:
> diff --git a/include/linux/acpi.h b/include/linux/acpi.h
> index a73246c3c35e..6a349d53f19e 100644
> --- a/include/linux/acpi.h
> +++ b/include/linux/acpi.h
> @@ -477,6 +477,10 @@ static inline int acpi_get_node(acpi_handle handle)
> return 0;
> }
> #endif
> +
> +#define ACPI_NODE_GET(adev) ((adev) && (adev)->handle ? \
> + acpi_get_node((adev)->handle) : NUMA_NO_NODE)
> +
> extern int pnpacpi_disabled;
>
> #define PXM_INVAL (-1)
> @@ -770,6 +774,7 @@ const char *acpi_get_subsystem_id(acpi_handle handle);
> #define ACPI_COMPANION_SET(dev, adev) do { } while (0)
> #define ACPI_HANDLE(dev) (NULL)
> #define ACPI_HANDLE_FWNODE(fwnode) (NULL)
> +#define ACPI_NODE_GET(adev) NUMA_NO_NODE
>
> #include <acpi/acpi_numa.h>
>
> --
> 2.20.1
>
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread* Re: [PATCH v6] driver core: platform: set numa_node before platform_device_add()
2023-09-18 13:45 [PATCH v6] driver core: platform: set numa_node before platform_device_add() Jinhui Guo
2023-09-18 14:34 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
@ 2023-09-18 15:17 ` Greg KH
2023-09-18 15:25 ` Jinhui Guo
` (2 subsequent siblings)
4 siblings, 0 replies; 6+ messages in thread
From: Greg KH @ 2023-09-18 15:17 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Jinhui Guo
Cc: rafael, lenb, lizefan.x, linux-acpi, linux-kernel, stable,
kernel test robot
On Mon, Sep 18, 2023 at 09:45:27PM +0800, Jinhui Guo wrote:
> Setting the devices' numa_node needs to be done in
> platform_device_register_full(), because that's where the
> platform device object is allocated.
>
> Fixes: 4a60406d3592 ("driver core: platform: expose numa_node to users in sysfs")
> Cc: stable@vger.kernel.org
> Reported-by: kernel test robot <lkp@intel.com>
> Closes: https://lore.kernel.org/oe-kbuild-all/202309122309.mbxAnAIe-lkp@intel.com/
> Reviewed-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
Where did I provide this tag?
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread* Re: [PATCH v6] driver core: platform: set numa_node before platform_device_add()
2023-09-18 13:45 [PATCH v6] driver core: platform: set numa_node before platform_device_add() Jinhui Guo
2023-09-18 14:34 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2023-09-18 15:17 ` Greg KH
@ 2023-09-18 15:25 ` Jinhui Guo
2023-09-18 15:29 ` Jinhui Guo
2023-09-18 15:44 ` Jinhui Guo
4 siblings, 0 replies; 6+ messages in thread
From: Jinhui Guo @ 2023-09-18 15:25 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: rafael
Cc: guojinhui.liam, gregkh, lenb, linux-acpi, linux-kernel,
lizefan.x, lkp, stable
> On Mon, Sep 18, 2023 at 3:46 PM Jinhui Guo <guojinhui.liam@bytedance.com> wrote:
> >
> > Setting the devices' numa_node needs to be done in
> > platform_device_register_full(), because that's where the
> > platform device object is allocated.
> >
> > Fixes: 4a60406d3592 ("driver core: platform: expose numa_node to users in sysfs")
> > Cc: stable@vger.kernel.org
> > Reported-by: kernel test robot <lkp@intel.com>
> > Closes: https://lore.kernel.org/oe-kbuild-all/202309122309.mbxAnAIe-lkp@intel.com/
> > Reviewed-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
> > Reviewed-by: Rafael J. Wysocki <rafael@kernel.org>
>
> No, I haven't given you this tag.
>
> I don't think that Greg has given you the one above either.
>
> Please don't add tage that you haven't received to your patches,
> because they are not applicable with incorrect tags.
>
I appologize to it. I just misunderstand what it means. I will drop it out soon.
> > Signed-off-by: Jinhui Guo <guojinhui.liam@bytedance.com>
> > ---
> > V5 -> V6:
> > 1. Update subject to correct function name platform_device_add().
> > 2. Provide a more clear and accurate description of the changes
> > made in commit (suggested by Rafael J. Wysocki).
> > 3. Add reviewer name.
> >
> > V4 -> V5:
> > Add Cc: stable line and changes from the previous submited patches.
> >
> > V3 -> V4:
> > Refactor code to be an ACPI function call.
> >
> > V2 -> V3:
> > Fix Signed-off name.
> >
> > V1 -> V2:
> > Fix compile error without enabling CONFIG_ACPI.
> > ---
> >
> > drivers/acpi/acpi_platform.c | 4 +---
> > drivers/base/platform.c | 1 +
> > include/linux/acpi.h | 5 +++++
> > 3 files changed, 7 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/drivers/acpi/acpi_platform.c b/drivers/acpi/acpi_platform.c
> > index 48d15dd785f6..adcbfbdc343f 100644
> > --- a/drivers/acpi/acpi_platform.c
> > +++ b/drivers/acpi/acpi_platform.c
> > @@ -178,11 +178,9 @@ struct platform_device *acpi_create_platform_device(struct acpi_device *adev,
> > if (IS_ERR(pdev))
> > dev_err(&adev->dev, "platform device creation failed: %ld\n",
> > PTR_ERR(pdev));
> > - else {
> > - set_dev_node(&pdev->dev, acpi_get_node(adev->handle));
> > + else
> > dev_dbg(&adev->dev, "created platform device %s\n",
> > dev_name(&pdev->dev));
> > - }
> >
> > kfree(resources);
> >
> > diff --git a/drivers/base/platform.c b/drivers/base/platform.c
> > index 76bfcba25003..35c891075d95 100644
> > --- a/drivers/base/platform.c
> > +++ b/drivers/base/platform.c
> > @@ -841,6 +841,7 @@ struct platform_device *platform_device_register_full(
> > goto err;
> > }
> >
> > + set_dev_node(&pdev->dev, ACPI_NODE_GET(ACPI_COMPANION(&pdev->dev)));
> > ret = platform_device_add(pdev);
> > if (ret) {
> > err:
> > diff --git a/include/linux/acpi.h b/include/linux/acpi.h
> > index a73246c3c35e..6a349d53f19e 100644
> > --- a/include/linux/acpi.h
> > +++ b/include/linux/acpi.h
> > @@ -477,6 +477,10 @@ static inline int acpi_get_node(acpi_handle handle)
> > return 0;
> > }
> > #endif
> > +
> > +#define ACPI_NODE_GET(adev) ((adev) && (adev)->handle ? \
> > + acpi_get_node((adev)->handle) : NUMA_NO_NODE)
> > +
> > extern int pnpacpi_disabled;
> >
> > #define PXM_INVAL (-1)
> > @@ -770,6 +774,7 @@ const char *acpi_get_subsystem_id(acpi_handle handle);
> > #define ACPI_COMPANION_SET(dev, adev) do { } while (0)
> > #define ACPI_HANDLE(dev) (NULL)
> > #define ACPI_HANDLE_FWNODE(fwnode) (NULL)
> > +#define ACPI_NODE_GET(adev) NUMA_NO_NODE
> >
> > #include <acpi/acpi_numa.h>
> >
> > --
> > 2.20.1
> >
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread* Re: [PATCH v6] driver core: platform: set numa_node before platform_device_add()
2023-09-18 13:45 [PATCH v6] driver core: platform: set numa_node before platform_device_add() Jinhui Guo
` (2 preceding siblings ...)
2023-09-18 15:25 ` Jinhui Guo
@ 2023-09-18 15:29 ` Jinhui Guo
2023-09-18 15:44 ` Jinhui Guo
4 siblings, 0 replies; 6+ messages in thread
From: Jinhui Guo @ 2023-09-18 15:29 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gregkh
Cc: guojinhui.liam, lenb, linux-acpi, linux-kernel, lizefan.x, lkp,
rafael, stable
> On Mon, Sep 18, 2023 at 09:45:27PM +0800, Jinhui Guo wrote:
> > Setting the devices' numa_node needs to be done in
> > platform_device_register_full(), because that's where the
> > platform device object is allocated.
> >
> > Fixes: 4a60406d3592 ("driver core: platform: expose numa_node to users in sysfs")
> > Cc: stable@vger.kernel.org
> > Reported-by: kernel test robot <lkp@intel.com>
> > Closes: https://lore.kernel.org/oe-kbuild-all/202309122309.mbxAnAIe-lkp@intel.com/
> > Reviewed-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
>
> Where did I provide this tag?
I appologize to it. I just misunderstand what it means. I will drop it out soon.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread* Re: [PATCH v6] driver core: platform: set numa_node before platform_device_add()
2023-09-18 13:45 [PATCH v6] driver core: platform: set numa_node before platform_device_add() Jinhui Guo
` (3 preceding siblings ...)
2023-09-18 15:29 ` Jinhui Guo
@ 2023-09-18 15:44 ` Jinhui Guo
4 siblings, 0 replies; 6+ messages in thread
From: Jinhui Guo @ 2023-09-18 15:44 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: rafael
Cc: guojinhui.liam, gregkh, lenb, linux-acpi, linux-kernel,
lizefan.x, lkp, stable
> On Mon, Sep 18, 2023 at 2:41 PM Jinhui Guo <guojinhui.liam@bytedance.com> wrote:
> >
> > On Mon, 18 Sep 2023 12:30:58 +0200, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> > > On Thu, Sep 14, 2023 at 11:32 PM Jinhui Guo
> > > <guojinhui.liam@bytedance.com> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > platform_add_device()
> > >
> > > According to "git grep" this function is not present in 6.6-rc2.
> > >
> > > If you mean platform_device_add(), please update the patch subject and
> > > changelog accordingly.
> > >
> >
> > This is my mistake, the function name was written wrong.
> > I will fix it in the next patch.
> >
> > > > creates the numa_node attribute of sysfs according
> > > > to whether dev_to_node(dev) is equal to NUMA_NO_NODE. So set the numa node
> > > > of device before creating numa_node attribute of sysfs.
> > >
> > > It would be good to also say that this needs to be done in
> > > platform_device_register_full(), because that's where the platform
> > > device object is allocated.
> > >
> >
> > Thaks for your suggestion. I will modify my decription soon.
> >
> > > However, what about adding the NUMA node information to pdevinfo? It
> > > would be more straightforward to handle it then AFAICS.
> > >
> >
> > I have tried three potential solutions to fix the bug:
> > 1. The first one is what the current patch do.
> >
> > 2. Add a new function interface only for acpi_create_platform_device() call.
> > But the code will be a bit redundant.
> >
> > 3. Add an member "numa_node" in `struct platform_device_info`, just as what
> > `struct device` done:
> >
> > ```
> > struct platform_device_info {
> > ...;
> > #ifdef CONFIG_NUMA
> > int numa_node;
> > #endif
> > ```
> >
> > But not all the call to platform_device_register_full() would set numa_node,
> > and many of them use ` memset(&pdevinfo, 0, sizeof(pdevinfo));` to initialize
> > `struct platform_device_info`. It could initialize numa_node to zero and
> > result in wrong numa_node information in sysfs.
>
> Well, platform_device_register_full() need not take that value as the
> numa node number directly. It may, for example, take the number from
> pdevinfo, subtract 1 from it and use the result of that as the numa
> node number, if not negative.
It's a good idea. I will try to fix the bug in this way.
Thanks,
Jinhui Guo
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread