Date: Tue, 1 Mar 2016 13:21:12 +0100
From: Robert Richter <robert.richter@caviumnetworks.com>
To: David Daney <ddaney.cavm@gmail.com>
CC: Robert Richter <rric@kernel.org>, Will Deacon <will.deacon@arm.com>,
        <linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org>,
        Rob Herring <robh+dt@kernel.org>, Pawel Moll <pawel.moll@arm.com>,
        Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@arm.com>,
        Ian Campbell <ijc+devicetree@hellion.org.uk>,
        Kumar Gala <galak@codeaurora.org>, <devicetree@vger.kernel.org>,
        Ard Biesheuvel <ard.biesheuvel@linaro.org>,
        Frank Rowand <frowand.list@gmail.com>,
        Grant Likely <grant.likely@linaro.org>,
        Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@arm.com>,
        Matt Fleming <matt@codeblueprint.co.uk>, <linux-efi@vger.kernel.org>,
        Ganapatrao Kulkarni <gkulkarni@caviumnetworks.com>,
        <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>, David Daney <david.daney@cavium.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v12 4/5] arm64, numa: Add NUMA support for arm64
 platforms.
Message-ID: <20160301122112.GU24726@rric.localdomain>
References: <1456192703-2274-1-git-send-email-ddaney.cavm@gmail.com>
 <1456192703-2274-5-git-send-email-ddaney.cavm@gmail.com>
 <20160229173446.GG31343@rric.localdomain>
 <56D4D782.3010503@gmail.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <56D4D782.3010503@gmail.com>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.23 (2014-03-12)
SpamDiagnosticOutput: 1:23
SpamDiagnosticMetadata: NSPM
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-OriginalArrivalTime: 01 Mar 2016 12:21:24.8328 (UTC)
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-FromEntityHeader: Hosted
X-MS-Exchange-Transport-CrossTenantHeadersStamped: BLUPR0701MB1602
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
List-ID: <linux-kernel.vger.kernel.org>
X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Content-Length: 1171
Lines: 42

On 29.02.16 15:42:58, David Daney wrote:
> On 02/29/2016 09:34 AM, Robert Richter wrote:
> >On 22.02.16 17:58:22, David Daney wrote:
> >>From: Ganapatrao Kulkarni <gkulkarni@caviumnetworks.com>

> >>+static int __init numa_init(int (*init_func)(void))
> >>+{
> >>+	int ret;
> >>+
> >>+	nodes_clear(numa_nodes_parsed);
> >>+	nodes_clear(node_possible_map);
> >>+	nodes_clear(node_online_map);
> >>+	numa_free_distance();
> 
>         ^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>      Cleanup for any previous numa_alloc_distance()
> 
> >>+
> >>+	ret = numa_alloc_distance();
> >>+	if (ret < 0)
> >>+		return ret;
> >
> >If you move this before the remaining initializers, you will need to
> >clean this up on error.
> 
> Yes, we do this.  See above.
> 
> >So better move it back after
> >numa_register_nodes() as it was in v10. This should work since
> >distances are used not earlier than numa is enabled.
> 
> I moved it here for a reason.
> 
> The init_func (of_numa_init() in this case) makes callbacks that use the
> numa_distance object.  We need to allocate it before using it. Allocating it
> after calling the init_func() is too late.

Sounds reasonable and looks sane now.

Thanks,

-Robert