lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2019]   [Sep]   [11]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
Patch in this message
/
SubjectRe: [PATCH 4/8] x86/platform/uv: Setup UV functions for Hubless UV Systems
From
Date


On 9/11/2019 1:44 PM, Mike Travis wrote:
>
>
> On 9/10/2019 11:07 PM, Ingo Molnar wrote:
>>
>> * Mike Travis <mike.travis@hpe.com> wrote:
>>
>>> +/* Initialize UV hubless systems */
>>> +static __init int uv_system_init_hubless(void)
>>> +{
>>> +    int rc;
>>> +
>>> +    /* Setup PCH NMI handler */
>>> +    uv_nmi_setup_hubless();
>>> +
>>> +    /* Init kernel/BIOS interface */
>>> +    rc = uv_bios_init();
>>> +
>>> +    return rc;
>>> +}
>
> This looks like an excessive cleanup error by me.  The original was:
>
>> +static __init int uv_system_init_hubless(void)
>> +{
>> +       int rc;
>> +
>> +       /* Setup PCH NMI handler */
>> +       uv_nmi_setup_hubless();
>> +
>> +       /* Init kernel/BIOS interface */
>> +       rc = uv_bios_init();
>> +
>> +       /* Create user access node if UVsystab available */
>> +       if (rc >= 0)
>> +               uv_setup_proc_files(1);
>> +
>> +       return rc;
>> +}
>> +
>
> Hubbed UV's do not have a non-UV BIOS, but hubless systems in theory
> can.   So uv_bios_init can fail on hubless systems if it has some other
> BIOS (unlikely but possible).  So I removed too much in this cleanup.
> I'll send another patch set that puts this back.

I discovered the problem... In a rearrangement of the patches this
change does happen but in a later patch [5/8]:

/* Initialize UV hubless systems */
static __init int uv_system_init_hubless(void)
{
@@ -1468,6 +1555,10 @@ static __init int uv_system_init_hubless
/* Init kernel/BIOS interface */
rc = uv_bios_init();

+ /* Create user access node if UVsystab available */
+ if (rc >= 0)
+ uv_setup_proc_files(1);
+
return rc;
}

The mistake you saw [in patch 3/8] is very short lived... Hopefully no
need for another patch set?
>
> Thanks,
> Mike
>
>>
>> Am I the only one who immediately sees the trivial C transformation
>> through which this function could lose a local variable and become 4
>> lines shorter?
>>
>> And this function got two Reviewed-by tags...
>>
>> Thanks,
>>
>>     Ingo
>>

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2019-09-11 22:59    [W:0.123 / U:0.800 seconds]
©2003-2018 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site