From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-19.0 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIMWL_WL_HIGH, DKIM_SIGNED,DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,INCLUDES_CR_TRAILER,INCLUDES_PATCH, MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS,USER_AGENT_SANE_1 autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 00199C433EF for ; Fri, 24 Sep 2021 02:09:48 +0000 (UTC) Received: from lists.xenproject.org (lists.xenproject.org [192.237.175.120]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id B9ED061108 for ; Fri, 24 Sep 2021 02:09:48 +0000 (UTC) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.4.1 mail.kernel.org B9ED061108 Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dmarc=fail (p=none dis=none) header.from=kernel.org Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=lists.xenproject.org Received: from list by lists.xenproject.org with outflank-mailman.194750.347006 (Exim 4.92) (envelope-from ) id 1mTaec-0001Rq-AQ; Fri, 24 Sep 2021 02:09:34 +0000 X-Outflank-Mailman: Message body and most headers restored to incoming version Received: by outflank-mailman (output) from mailman id 194750.347006; Fri, 24 Sep 2021 02:09:34 +0000 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=lists.xenproject.org) by lists.xenproject.org with esmtp (Exim 4.92) (envelope-from ) id 1mTaec-0001Rj-6k; Fri, 24 Sep 2021 02:09:34 +0000 Received: by outflank-mailman (input) for mailman id 194750; Fri, 24 Sep 2021 02:09:33 +0000 Received: from us1-rack-iad1.inumbo.com ([172.99.69.81]) by lists.xenproject.org with esmtp (Exim 4.92) (envelope-from ) id 1mTaeb-0001Rd-1g for xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org; Fri, 24 Sep 2021 02:09:33 +0000 Received: from mail.kernel.org (unknown [198.145.29.99]) by us1-rack-iad1.inumbo.com (Halon) with ESMTPS id 7f0eb23e-c6bf-4278-8105-caf39900c3fe; Fri, 24 Sep 2021 02:09:32 +0000 (UTC) Received: by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 21A6E60F6F; Fri, 24 Sep 2021 02:09:31 +0000 (UTC) X-BeenThere: xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org List-Id: Xen developer discussion List-Unsubscribe: , List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xenproject.org Precedence: list Sender: "Xen-devel" X-Inumbo-ID: 7f0eb23e-c6bf-4278-8105-caf39900c3fe DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=kernel.org; s=k20201202; t=1632449371; bh=4jZPYpku3wEyw6MbydFbpZitaGb3nPMzTYyK/u6mYqE=; h=Date:From:To:cc:Subject:In-Reply-To:References:From; b=M88FS1ww3E6oPisAhKI6Qo/04ZW6UYWgzpw5eIz24IUkn54BvYA38BBPYuktDiMhk RiAZO1HZVzVxGoWHTCIP496DrucCLGYa8x/cTdmlPwJiTR79MZiAKxiEuD76g++exJ 8M3C5KpyW0z+MybcZZDQcw1dYbYyZby1qPMnevmerd8w4jPFIZ6UIv+dhu8tj+z7j1 pe9wklR5EZCbs8juAOZ9fE8/okGgBRwLgXVvHMHp3dQVloUjgzOihaS/4/+0/NvLAz fUlSloj7GQyW7YXjjr+1eE0Il94HxZGhO5B/TcfYST37sHR4AvZf4wfz/7w1+v4o/c Ab7LXnjhJhkTQ== Date: Thu, 23 Sep 2021 19:09:30 -0700 (PDT) From: Stefano Stabellini X-X-Sender: sstabellini@sstabellini-ThinkPad-T480s To: Wei Chen cc: xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org, sstabellini@kernel.org, julien@xen.org, Bertrand.Marquis@arm.com, jbeulich@suse.com, andrew.cooper3@citrix.com, roger.pau@citrix.com, wl@xen.org Subject: Re: [PATCH 25/37] xen/arm: implement bad_srat for Arm NUMA initialization In-Reply-To: <20210923120236.3692135-26-wei.chen@arm.com> Message-ID: References: <20210923120236.3692135-1-wei.chen@arm.com> <20210923120236.3692135-26-wei.chen@arm.com> User-Agent: Alpine 2.21 (DEB 202 2017-01-01) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII On Thu, 23 Sep 2021, Wei Chen wrote: > NUMA initialization will parse information from firmware provided > static resource affinity table (ACPI SRAT or DTB). bad_srat if a > function that will be used when initialization code encounters > some unexcepted errors. > > In this patch, we introduce Arm version bad_srat for NUMA common > initialization code to invoke it. > > Signed-off-by: Wei Chen > --- > xen/arch/arm/numa.c | 7 +++++++ > 1 file changed, 7 insertions(+) > > diff --git a/xen/arch/arm/numa.c b/xen/arch/arm/numa.c > index 3755b01ef4..5209d3de4d 100644 > --- a/xen/arch/arm/numa.c > +++ b/xen/arch/arm/numa.c > @@ -18,6 +18,7 @@ > * > */ > #include > +#include > #include > > static uint8_t __read_mostly > @@ -25,6 +26,12 @@ node_distance_map[MAX_NUMNODES][MAX_NUMNODES] = { > { 0 } > }; > > +__init void bad_srat(void) > +{ > + printk(KERN_ERR "NUMA: Firmware SRAT table not used.\n"); > + fw_numa = -1; > +} I realize that the series keeps the "srat" terminology everywhere on DT too. I wonder if it is worth replacing srat with something like "numa_distance" everywhere as appropriate. I am adding the x86 maintainers for an opinion. If you guys prefer to keep srat (if nothing else, it is concise), I am also OK with keeping srat although it is not technically accurate.