From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail-oa0-f54.google.com (mail-oa0-f54.google.com [209.85.219.54]) by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id CF71F6B0039 for ; Wed, 8 Jan 2014 10:27:07 -0500 (EST) Received: by mail-oa0-f54.google.com with SMTP id o6so1947718oag.27 for ; Wed, 08 Jan 2014 07:27:07 -0800 (PST) Received: from bear.ext.ti.com (bear.ext.ti.com. [192.94.94.41]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id r7si797304oem.136.2014.01.08.07.27.06 for (version=TLSv1 cipher=RC4-SHA bits=128/128); Wed, 08 Jan 2014 07:27:06 -0800 (PST) From: Grygorii Strashko Subject: [PATCH] x86/mm: memblock: switch to use NUMA_NO_NODE Date: Wed, 8 Jan 2014 18:23:18 +0200 Message-ID: <1389198198-31027-1-git-send-email-grygorii.strashko@ti.com> In-Reply-To: <20140107022559.GE14055@localhost> References: <20140107022559.GE14055@localhost> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org List-ID: To: Fengguang Wu , santosh.shilimkar@ti.com Cc: x86@kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-mm@kvack.org, Grygorii Strashko , Andrew Morton , Stephen Rothwell , Tejun Heo , Yinghai Lu , David Rientjes , Thomas Gleixner , Ingo Molnar , "H. Peter Anvin" Update X86 code to use NUMA_NO_NODE instead of MAX_NUMNODES while calling memblock APIs, because memblock API is changed to use NUMA_NO_NODE and will produce warning during boot otherwise. See: https://lkml.org/lkml/2013/12/9/898 Cc: Santosh Shilimkar Cc: Andrew Morton Cc: Stephen Rothwell Cc: Tejun Heo Cc: Yinghai Lu Cc: David Rientjes Cc: Thomas Gleixner Cc: Ingo Molnar Cc: "H. Peter Anvin" Signed-off-by: Grygorii Strashko --- Hi Fengguang, This patch should fix these warnings. Regards, -grygorii arch/x86/kernel/check.c | 2 +- arch/x86/kernel/e820.c | 2 +- arch/x86/mm/memtest.c | 2 +- 3 files changed, 3 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-) diff --git a/arch/x86/kernel/check.c b/arch/x86/kernel/check.c index e2dbcb7..83a7995 100644 --- a/arch/x86/kernel/check.c +++ b/arch/x86/kernel/check.c @@ -91,7 +91,7 @@ void __init setup_bios_corruption_check(void) corruption_check_size = round_up(corruption_check_size, PAGE_SIZE); - for_each_free_mem_range(i, MAX_NUMNODES, &start, &end, NULL) { + for_each_free_mem_range(i, NUMA_NO_NODE, &start, &end, NULL) { start = clamp_t(phys_addr_t, round_up(start, PAGE_SIZE), PAGE_SIZE, corruption_check_size); end = clamp_t(phys_addr_t, round_down(end, PAGE_SIZE), diff --git a/arch/x86/kernel/e820.c b/arch/x86/kernel/e820.c index 174da5f..988c00a 100644 --- a/arch/x86/kernel/e820.c +++ b/arch/x86/kernel/e820.c @@ -1120,7 +1120,7 @@ void __init memblock_find_dma_reserve(void) nr_pages += end_pfn - start_pfn; } - for_each_free_mem_range(u, MAX_NUMNODES, &start, &end, NULL) { + for_each_free_mem_range(u, NUMA_NO_NODE, &start, &end, NULL) { start_pfn = min_t(unsigned long, PFN_UP(start), MAX_DMA_PFN); end_pfn = min_t(unsigned long, PFN_DOWN(end), MAX_DMA_PFN); if (start_pfn < end_pfn) diff --git a/arch/x86/mm/memtest.c b/arch/x86/mm/memtest.c index 8dabbed..1e9da79 100644 --- a/arch/x86/mm/memtest.c +++ b/arch/x86/mm/memtest.c @@ -74,7 +74,7 @@ static void __init do_one_pass(u64 pattern, u64 start, u64 end) u64 i; phys_addr_t this_start, this_end; - for_each_free_mem_range(i, MAX_NUMNODES, &this_start, &this_end, NULL) { + for_each_free_mem_range(i, NUMA_NO_NODE, &this_start, &this_end, NULL) { this_start = clamp_t(phys_addr_t, this_start, start, end); this_end = clamp_t(phys_addr_t, this_end, start, end); if (this_start < this_end) { -- 1.7.9.5 -- 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: email@kvack.org