From: Zi Yan <ziy@nvidia.com>
To: Donet Tom <donettom@linux.ibm.com>
Cc: Mike Rapoport <rppt@kernel.org>,
David Hildenbrand <david@redhat.com>,
Oscar Salvador <osalvador@suse.de>,
Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
rafael@kernel.org, Danilo Krummrich <dakr@kernel.org>,
Ritesh Harjani <ritesh.list@gmail.com>,
Jonathan Cameron <Jonathan.Cameron@huawei.com>,
Alison Schofield <alison.schofield@intel.com>,
Yury Norov <yury.norov@gmail.com>,
Dave Jiang <dave.jiang@intel.com>,
linux-mm@kvack.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 2/2] driver/base: Remove unused functions
Date: Thu, 01 May 2025 11:08:22 -0400 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <0EBDDF27-E05A-43D2-834D-987D6228A516@nvidia.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <273649393600cb33ac3eec0e9a523c2d1853a47c.1745852397.git.donettom@linux.ibm.com>
On 28 Apr 2025, at 13:03, Donet Tom wrote:
> The functions register_mem_block_under_node_early and get_nid_for_pfn
> are not used, as register_memory_blocks_under_node_early is now used
> to register memory blocks during early boot. Therefore, these unused
> functions have been removed.
>
> Signed-off-by: Donet Tom <donettom@linux.ibm.com>
> ---
> drivers/base/node.c | 54 +--------------------------------------------
> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 53 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/base/node.c b/drivers/base/node.c
> index 4869333d366d..59ec507fc97d 100644
> --- a/drivers/base/node.c
> +++ b/drivers/base/node.c
> @@ -748,15 +748,6 @@ int unregister_cpu_under_node(unsigned int cpu, unsigned int nid)
> }
>
> #ifdef CONFIG_MEMORY_HOTPLUG
> -static int __ref get_nid_for_pfn(unsigned long pfn)
> -{
> -#ifdef CONFIG_DEFERRED_STRUCT_PAGE_INIT
> - if (system_state < SYSTEM_RUNNING)
> - return early_pfn_to_nid(pfn);
> -#endif
> - return pfn_to_nid(pfn);
> -}
> -
> static void do_register_memory_block_under_node(int nid,
> struct memory_block *mem_blk,
> enum meminit_context context)
> @@ -783,46 +774,6 @@ static void do_register_memory_block_under_node(int nid,
> ret);
> }
>
> -/* register memory section under specified node if it spans that node */
> -static int register_mem_block_under_node_early(struct memory_block *mem_blk,
> - void *arg)
> -{
> - unsigned long memory_block_pfns = memory_block_size_bytes() / PAGE_SIZE;
> - unsigned long start_pfn = section_nr_to_pfn(mem_blk->start_section_nr);
> - unsigned long end_pfn = start_pfn + memory_block_pfns - 1;
> - int nid = *(int *)arg;
> - unsigned long pfn;
> -
> - for (pfn = start_pfn; pfn <= end_pfn; pfn++) {
> - int page_nid;
> -
> - /*
> - * memory block could have several absent sections from start.
> - * skip pfn range from absent section
> - */
> - if (!pfn_in_present_section(pfn)) {
> - pfn = round_down(pfn + PAGES_PER_SECTION,
> - PAGES_PER_SECTION) - 1;
> - continue;
> - }
> -
> - /*
> - * We need to check if page belongs to nid only at the boot
> - * case because node's ranges can be interleaved.
> - */
> - page_nid = get_nid_for_pfn(pfn);
> - if (page_nid < 0)
> - continue;
> - if (page_nid != nid)
> - continue;
> -
> - do_register_memory_block_under_node(nid, mem_blk, MEMINIT_EARLY);
> - return 0;
> - }
> - /* mem section does not span the specified node */
> - return 0;
> -}
> -
> /*
> * During hotplug we know that all pages in the memory block belong to the same
> * node.
> @@ -895,10 +846,7 @@ void register_memory_blocks_under_node(int nid, unsigned long start_pfn,
> {
Should this function be renamed to register_memory_blocks_under_node_hotplug
to reflect its current implementation?
> walk_memory_blocks_func_t func;
>
> - if (context == MEMINIT_HOTPLUG)
> - func = register_mem_block_under_node_hotplug;
> - else
> - func = register_mem_block_under_node_early;
> + func = register_mem_block_under_node_hotplug;
>
> walk_memory_blocks(PFN_PHYS(start_pfn), PFN_PHYS(end_pfn - start_pfn),
> (void *)&nid, func);
> --
> 2.48.1
--
Best Regards,
Yan, Zi
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2025-05-01 15:08 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 15+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2025-04-28 17:03 [PATCH v2 1/2] driver/base: Optimize memory block registration to reduce boot time Donet Tom
2025-04-28 17:03 ` [PATCH v2 2/2] driver/base: Remove unused functions Donet Tom
2025-04-28 21:21 ` David Hildenbrand
2025-04-29 14:07 ` Donet Tom
2025-04-30 7:48 ` Oscar Salvador
2025-05-01 13:49 ` Donet Tom
2025-05-01 15:08 ` Zi Yan [this message]
2025-05-01 15:15 ` Donet Tom
2025-04-28 21:19 ` [PATCH v2 1/2] driver/base: Optimize memory block registration to reduce boot time David Hildenbrand
2025-04-29 14:08 ` Donet Tom
2025-04-29 16:37 ` kernel test robot
2025-04-29 17:01 ` kernel test robot
2025-05-01 14:10 ` Donet Tom
2025-04-30 7:38 ` Oscar Salvador
2025-05-01 13:55 ` Donet Tom
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=0EBDDF27-E05A-43D2-834D-987D6228A516@nvidia.com \
--to=ziy@nvidia.com \
--cc=Jonathan.Cameron@huawei.com \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=alison.schofield@intel.com \
--cc=dakr@kernel.org \
--cc=dave.jiang@intel.com \
--cc=david@redhat.com \
--cc=donettom@linux.ibm.com \
--cc=gregkh@linuxfoundation.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
--cc=osalvador@suse.de \
--cc=rafael@kernel.org \
--cc=ritesh.list@gmail.com \
--cc=rppt@kernel.org \
--cc=yury.norov@gmail.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox