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 Received: from kanga.kvack.org (kanga.kvack.org [205.233.56.17]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 56754C74A5B for ; Thu, 23 Mar 2023 08:30:14 +0000 (UTC) Received: by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) id EA0956B0072; Thu, 23 Mar 2023 04:30:13 -0400 (EDT) Received: by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix, from userid 40) id E515D6B0074; Thu, 23 Mar 2023 04:30:13 -0400 (EDT) X-Delivered-To: int-list-linux-mm@kvack.org Received: by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix, from userid 63042) id D19BE6B0075; Thu, 23 Mar 2023 04:30:13 -0400 (EDT) X-Delivered-To: linux-mm@kvack.org Received: from relay.hostedemail.com (smtprelay0014.hostedemail.com [216.40.44.14]) by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C36F16B0072 for ; Thu, 23 Mar 2023 04:30:13 -0400 (EDT) Received: from smtpin18.hostedemail.com (a10.router.float.18 [10.200.18.1]) by unirelay10.hostedemail.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 67476C064A for ; Thu, 23 Mar 2023 08:30:13 +0000 (UTC) X-FDA: 80599490706.18.686BA25 Received: from outpost1.zedat.fu-berlin.de (outpost1.zedat.fu-berlin.de [130.133.4.66]) by imf25.hostedemail.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1F440A0016 for ; Thu, 23 Mar 2023 08:30:10 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: imf25.hostedemail.com; dkim=none; dmarc=none; spf=pass (imf25.hostedemail.com: domain of glaubitz@zedat.fu-berlin.de designates 130.133.4.66 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=glaubitz@zedat.fu-berlin.de ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=hostedemail.com; s=arc-20220608; t=1679560211; h=from:from:sender:reply-to:subject:subject:date:date: message-id:message-id:to:to:cc:cc:mime-version:mime-version: content-type:content-type: content-transfer-encoding:content-transfer-encoding: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=XN3GfEfva9qp9+Xy8ZseRpEX83K71F0ETmcQuRWt9pU=; b=VU02sNwtuhHgBaM6AGCG+gZ6+s+IxNk7IhMhqDQCol1tH5bprWqyKDt5fkHNu6q01OMrfK RTOIgExRKmUpqBKgKOfgALj6s13JXLMeAwYEV0WAQvFtkNPsWFKP78y9yMsB5NgEQ9nRwb kzsnuVjl6ZVG0zM0FXkhIdrbhdYkXpE= ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; imf25.hostedemail.com; dkim=none; dmarc=none; spf=pass (imf25.hostedemail.com: domain of glaubitz@zedat.fu-berlin.de designates 130.133.4.66 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=glaubitz@zedat.fu-berlin.de ARC-Seal: i=1; s=arc-20220608; d=hostedemail.com; t=1679560211; a=rsa-sha256; cv=none; b=LrBHbmOJN06rUpnhQG+pECJnCwvr8w5y4QRLqSmw10l7fepaH1NTCPAKj2dMVAu4IgkSBj a9Br49J7R8lhek8TC4AtcZIkNBKezWFDHIqPFbTLQJ3oPf3Z4lQTWIkVMqbo4bxUwnkz6R j64iqO1cRqqa5QRG+Gn+109ILwKUcOE= Received: from inpost2.zedat.fu-berlin.de ([130.133.4.69]) by outpost.zedat.fu-berlin.de (Exim 4.95) with esmtps (TLS1.3) tls TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (envelope-from ) id 1pfGJ0-002TGv-My; Thu, 23 Mar 2023 09:28:18 +0100 Received: from p57bd9952.dip0.t-ipconnect.de ([87.189.153.82] helo=[192.168.178.81]) by inpost2.zedat.fu-berlin.de (Exim 4.95) with esmtpsa (TLS1.3) tls TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (envelope-from ) id 1pfGJ0-004B39-FY; Thu, 23 Mar 2023 09:28:18 +0100 Message-ID: <4cd6f0c8d7603254df9e2eb1e7b80973e75c4e45.camel@physik.fu-berlin.de> Subject: Re: [PATCH] mm/slab: Fix undefined init_cache_node_node() for NUMA and !SMP From: John Paul Adrian Glaubitz To: Geert Uytterhoeven , Matthew Wilcox Cc: Dave Hansen , Dave Hansen , Arnd Bergmann , Christoph Lameter , Pekka Enberg , David Rientjes , Joonsoo Kim , Andrew Morton , Vlastimil Babka , Roman Gushchin , Hyeonggon Yoo <42.hyeyoo@gmail.com>, linux-mm@kvack.org, linux-sh@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Randy Dunlap Date: Thu, 23 Mar 2023 09:28:17 +0100 In-Reply-To: References: <67261c513706241d479b8b4cf46eb4e6fb0417ba.1679387262.git.geert+renesas@glider.be> <6320abf6-0898-361b-d5f6-bcc58306f55c@intel.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable User-Agent: Evolution 3.46.4 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Original-Sender: glaubitz@physik.fu-berlin.de X-Originating-IP: 87.189.153.82 X-ZEDAT-Hint: PO X-Rspamd-Server: rspam07 X-Rspamd-Queue-Id: 1F440A0016 X-Rspam-User: X-Stat-Signature: i1s81z441esrdsbfxhbwd3kf44nmsdaw X-HE-Tag: 1679560210-171513 X-HE-Meta: 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 ZQyg+vZJ 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 X-Bogosity: Ham, tests=bogofilter, spamicity=0.000000, version=1.2.4 Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org Precedence: bulk X-Loop: owner-majordomo@kvack.org List-ID: Hi Geert! On Thu, 2023-03-23 at 09:25 +0100, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote: > It's supported. Dave just forgot to update the #ifdef around the > definition of init_cache_node_node() when updating an #ifdef around > a code block that contains one of the callers. >=20 > P.S. To me, this discussion reminds me of the old discussion about > discontigmem without NUMA. Yes, not all systems are PCs with > contiguous memory on a single fast bus ;-) I'm wondering: Could the NUMA code be used to work with the different memory types found on the Amiga, i.e. chip RAM, fast RAM etc? Adrian --=20 .''`. John Paul Adrian Glaubitz : :' : Debian Developer `. `' Physicist `- GPG: 62FF 8A75 84E0 2956 9546 0006 7426 3B37 F5B5 F913