Messages in this thread Patch in this message | | | Subject | [PATCH v2] x86/numa_emulation: fix parsing of numa_meminfo for uniform numa emulation | From | Dave Jiang <> | Date | Wed, 19 Sep 2018 11:12:14 -0700 |
| |
During fakenuma processing in numa_emulation(), pi gets passed in and processed as new fake numa nodes are being split out. Once the original memory region is proccessed, it gets removed from the pi by numa_remove_memblk_from() in emu_setup_memblk(). So entry 0 gets deleted and the rest of the entries get moved up. Therefore we should always pass in entry 0 for the next entry to process.
Fixes: 1f6a2c6d9f121 ("x86/numa_emulation: Introduce uniform split capability")
Cc: Dan Williams <dan.j.williams@intel.com> Signed-off-by: Dave Jiang <dave.jiang@intel.com> Reviewed-by: Dan Williams <dan.j.williams@intel.com> ---
V2: - Add comment for the code change (Dan)
arch/x86/mm/numa_emulation.c | 12 ++++++++++-- 1 file changed, 10 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
diff --git a/arch/x86/mm/numa_emulation.c b/arch/x86/mm/numa_emulation.c index b54d52a2d00a..d71d72cf6c66 100644 --- a/arch/x86/mm/numa_emulation.c +++ b/arch/x86/mm/numa_emulation.c @@ -400,9 +400,17 @@ void __init numa_emulation(struct numa_meminfo *numa_meminfo, int numa_dist_cnt) n = simple_strtoul(emu_cmdline, &emu_cmdline, 0); ret = -1; for_each_node_mask(i, physnode_mask) { + /* + * The reason we pass in blk[0] is due to + * numa_remove_memblk_from() called by + * emu_setup_memblk() will delete entry 0 + * and then move everything else up in the pi.blk + * array. Therefore we should always be looking + * at blk[0]. + */ ret = split_nodes_size_interleave_uniform(&ei, &pi, - pi.blk[i].start, pi.blk[i].end, 0, - n, &pi.blk[i], nid); + pi.blk[0].start, pi.blk[0].end, 0, + n, &pi.blk[0], nid); if (ret < 0) break; if (ret < n) {
| |