* N_NORMAL on NUMA?
@ 2014-02-21 0:30 Nishanth Aravamudan
2014-02-24 19:45 ` Christoph Lameter
0 siblings, 1 reply; 2+ messages in thread
From: Nishanth Aravamudan @ 2014-02-21 0:30 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: linux-mm; +Cc: rientjes, cl, anton
I'm confused by the following:
/*
* Array of node states.
*/
nodemask_t node_states[NR_NODE_STATES] __read_mostly = {
[N_POSSIBLE] = NODE_MASK_ALL,
[N_ONLINE] = { { [0] = 1UL } },
#ifndef CONFIG_NUMA
[N_NORMAL_MEMORY] = { { [0] = 1UL } },
#ifdef CONFIG_HIGHMEM
[N_HIGH_MEMORY] = { { [0] = 1UL } },
#endif
#ifdef CONFIG_MOVABLE_NODE
[N_MEMORY] = { { [0] = 1UL } },
#endif
[N_CPU] = { { [0] = 1UL } },
#endif /* NUMA */
};
Why are we checking for CONFIG_MOVABLE_NODE above when mm/Kconfig says:
config MOVABLE_NODE
boolean "Enable to assign a node which has only movable memory"
depends on HAVE_MEMBLOCK
depends on NO_BOOTMEM
depends on X86_64
depends on NUMA
? Doesn't that mean that you can't have CONFIG_HAVE_MOVABLE_NODE without
CONFIG_NUMA? But we're in a #ifndef CONFIG_NUMA block above...
Thanks,
Nish
--
To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in
the body to majordomo@kvack.org. For more info on Linux MM,
see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ .
Don't email: <a href=mailto:"dont@kvack.org"> email@kvack.org </a>
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 2+ messages in thread
* Re: N_NORMAL on NUMA?
2014-02-21 0:30 N_NORMAL on NUMA? Nishanth Aravamudan
@ 2014-02-24 19:45 ` Christoph Lameter
0 siblings, 0 replies; 2+ messages in thread
From: Christoph Lameter @ 2014-02-24 19:45 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Nishanth Aravamudan; +Cc: linux-mm, rientjes, anton
On Thu, 20 Feb 2014, Nishanth Aravamudan wrote:
> I'm confused by the following:
>
> /*
> * Array of node states.
> */
> nodemask_t node_states[NR_NODE_STATES] __read_mostly = {
> [N_POSSIBLE] = NODE_MASK_ALL,
> [N_ONLINE] = { { [0] = 1UL } },
> #ifndef CONFIG_NUMA
> [N_NORMAL_MEMORY] = { { [0] = 1UL } },
> #ifdef CONFIG_HIGHMEM
> [N_HIGH_MEMORY] = { { [0] = 1UL } },
> #endif
> #ifdef CONFIG_MOVABLE_NODE
> [N_MEMORY] = { { [0] = 1UL } },
> #endif
> [N_CPU] = { { [0] = 1UL } },
> #endif /* NUMA */
> };
>
> Why are we checking for CONFIG_MOVABLE_NODE above when mm/Kconfig says:
>
> config MOVABLE_NODE
> boolean "Enable to assign a node which has only movable memory"
> depends on HAVE_MEMBLOCK
> depends on NO_BOOTMEM
> depends on X86_64
> depends on NUMA
>
> ? Doesn't that mean that you can't have CONFIG_HAVE_MOVABLE_NODE without
> CONFIG_NUMA? But we're in a #ifndef CONFIG_NUMA block above...
Looks like a useless definition that can be removed then.
--
To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in
the body to majordomo@kvack.org. For more info on Linux MM,
see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ .
Don't email: <a href=mailto:"dont@kvack.org"> email@kvack.org </a>
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 2+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2014-02-24 19:45 UTC | newest]
Thread overview: 2+ messages (download: mbox.gz / follow: Atom feed)
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2014-02-21 0:30 N_NORMAL on NUMA? Nishanth Aravamudan
2014-02-24 19:45 ` Christoph Lameter
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.