diff mbox

[RFC,v3,05/24] x86: NUMA: Add accessors for nodes[] and node_memblk_range[] structs

Message ID 1500378106-2620-6-git-send-email-vijay.kilari@gmail.com (mailing list archive)
State New, archived
Headers show

Commit Message

Vijay Kilari July 18, 2017, 11:41 a.m. UTC 
From: Vijaya Kumar K <Vijaya.Kumar@cavium.com>

Add accessors for nodes[] and other static variables and
use those accessors. These variables are later accessed
outside the file when the code made generic in later
patches. However the coding style is not changed.

Signed-off-by: Vijaya Kumar K <Vijaya.Kumar@cavium.com>
---
v3: - Changed accessors parameter from int to unsigned int
    - Updated commit message
    - Fixed wrong indentation
---
 xen/arch/x86/srat.c | 106 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-------------
 1 file changed, 81 insertions(+), 25 deletions(-)

Comments

Wei Liu July 18, 2017, 3:29 p.m. UTC | #1 
On Tue, Jul 18, 2017 at 05:11:27PM +0530, vijay.kilari@gmail.com wrote:
> From: Vijaya Kumar K <Vijaya.Kumar@cavium.com>
> 
> Add accessors for nodes[] and other static variables and
> use those accessors. These variables are later accessed
> outside the file when the code made generic in later
> patches. However the coding style is not changed.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Vijaya Kumar K <Vijaya.Kumar@cavium.com>
> ---
> v3: - Changed accessors parameter from int to unsigned int
>     - Updated commit message
>     - Fixed wrong indentation
> ---
>  xen/arch/x86/srat.c | 106 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-------------
>  1 file changed, 81 insertions(+), 25 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/xen/arch/x86/srat.c b/xen/arch/x86/srat.c
> index 535c9d7..42cca5a 100644
> --- a/xen/arch/x86/srat.c
> +++ b/xen/arch/x86/srat.c
> @@ -41,6 +41,44 @@ static struct node node_memblk_range[NR_NODE_MEMBLKS];
>  static nodeid_t memblk_nodeid[NR_NODE_MEMBLKS];
>  static __initdata DECLARE_BITMAP(memblk_hotplug, NR_NODE_MEMBLKS);
>  
> +static struct node *get_numa_node(unsigned int id)
> +{
> +	return &nodes[id];
> +}
> +
> +static nodeid_t get_memblk_nodeid(unsigned int id)
> +{
> +	return memblk_nodeid[id];
> +}
> +
> +static nodeid_t *get_memblk_nodeid_map(void)
> +{
> +	return &memblk_nodeid[0];
> +}
> +
> +static struct node *get_node_memblk_range(unsigned int memblk)
> +{
> +	return &node_memblk_range[memblk];
> +}
> +
> +static int get_num_node_memblks(void)
> +{
> +	return num_node_memblks;
> +}

They should all be inline functions. And maybe at once lift to a header
and add proper prefix since you mention they are going to be used later.
Vijay Kilari July 19, 2017, 6:40 a.m. UTC | #2 
On Tue, Jul 18, 2017 at 8:59 PM, Wei Liu <wei.liu2@citrix.com> wrote:
> On Tue, Jul 18, 2017 at 05:11:27PM +0530, vijay.kilari@gmail.com wrote:
>> From: Vijaya Kumar K <Vijaya.Kumar@cavium.com>
>>
>> Add accessors for nodes[] and other static variables and
>> use those accessors. These variables are later accessed
>> outside the file when the code made generic in later
>> patches. However the coding style is not changed.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Vijaya Kumar K <Vijaya.Kumar@cavium.com>
>> ---
>> v3: - Changed accessors parameter from int to unsigned int
>>     - Updated commit message
>>     - Fixed wrong indentation
>> ---
>>  xen/arch/x86/srat.c | 106 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-------------
>>  1 file changed, 81 insertions(+), 25 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/xen/arch/x86/srat.c b/xen/arch/x86/srat.c
>> index 535c9d7..42cca5a 100644
>> --- a/xen/arch/x86/srat.c
>> +++ b/xen/arch/x86/srat.c
>> @@ -41,6 +41,44 @@ static struct node node_memblk_range[NR_NODE_MEMBLKS];
>>  static nodeid_t memblk_nodeid[NR_NODE_MEMBLKS];
>>  static __initdata DECLARE_BITMAP(memblk_hotplug, NR_NODE_MEMBLKS);
>>
>> +static struct node *get_numa_node(unsigned int id)
>> +{
>> +     return &nodes[id];
>> +}
>> +
>> +static nodeid_t get_memblk_nodeid(unsigned int id)
>> +{
>> +     return memblk_nodeid[id];
>> +}
>> +
>> +static nodeid_t *get_memblk_nodeid_map(void)
>> +{
>> +     return &memblk_nodeid[0];
>> +}
>> +
>> +static struct node *get_node_memblk_range(unsigned int memblk)
>> +{
>> +     return &node_memblk_range[memblk];
>> +}
>> +
>> +static int get_num_node_memblks(void)
>> +{
>> +     return num_node_memblks;
>> +}
>
> They should all be inline functions. And maybe at once lift to a header
> and add proper prefix since you mention they are going to be used later.

Currently these are static variables in x86/srat.c file.
In patch #9 I move them to common/numa.c file and make these functions
non-static.

If I lift them to header file and make inline, then I have to make these as
global variables.

Regards
Vijay
Julien Grall July 19, 2017, 5:18 p.m. UTC | #3 
On 19/07/17 07:40, Vijay Kilari wrote:
> On Tue, Jul 18, 2017 at 8:59 PM, Wei Liu <wei.liu2@citrix.com> wrote:
>> On Tue, Jul 18, 2017 at 05:11:27PM +0530, vijay.kilari@gmail.com wrote:
>>> From: Vijaya Kumar K <Vijaya.Kumar@cavium.com>
>>>
>>> Add accessors for nodes[] and other static variables and
>>> use those accessors. These variables are later accessed
>>> outside the file when the code made generic in later
>>> patches. However the coding style is not changed.
>>>
>>> Signed-off-by: Vijaya Kumar K <Vijaya.Kumar@cavium.com>
>>> ---
>>> v3: - Changed accessors parameter from int to unsigned int
>>>     - Updated commit message
>>>     - Fixed wrong indentation
>>> ---
>>>  xen/arch/x86/srat.c | 106 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-------------
>>>  1 file changed, 81 insertions(+), 25 deletions(-)
>>>
>>> diff --git a/xen/arch/x86/srat.c b/xen/arch/x86/srat.c
>>> index 535c9d7..42cca5a 100644
>>> --- a/xen/arch/x86/srat.c
>>> +++ b/xen/arch/x86/srat.c
>>> @@ -41,6 +41,44 @@ static struct node node_memblk_range[NR_NODE_MEMBLKS];
>>>  static nodeid_t memblk_nodeid[NR_NODE_MEMBLKS];
>>>  static __initdata DECLARE_BITMAP(memblk_hotplug, NR_NODE_MEMBLKS);
>>>
>>> +static struct node *get_numa_node(unsigned int id)
>>> +{
>>> +     return &nodes[id];
>>> +}
>>> +
>>> +static nodeid_t get_memblk_nodeid(unsigned int id)
>>> +{
>>> +     return memblk_nodeid[id];
>>> +}
>>> +
>>> +static nodeid_t *get_memblk_nodeid_map(void)
>>> +{
>>> +     return &memblk_nodeid[0];
>>> +}
>>> +
>>> +static struct node *get_node_memblk_range(unsigned int memblk)
>>> +{
>>> +     return &node_memblk_range[memblk];
>>> +}
>>> +
>>> +static int get_num_node_memblks(void)
>>> +{
>>> +     return num_node_memblks;
>>> +}
>>
>> They should all be inline functions. And maybe at once lift to a header
>> and add proper prefix since you mention they are going to be used later.
>
> Currently these are static variables in x86/srat.c file.
> In patch #9 I move them to common/numa.c file and make these functions
> non-static.
>
> If I lift them to header file and make inline, then I have to make these as
> global variables.

As I said on v2, I am not sure to understand the usefulness of those 
accessors over global variables...

You don't have any kind of sanity check, so they would do exactly the 
same job. The global variables would avoid so much churn.

More that you tend to sometimes use global and other time static helpers...

Cheers,
Vijay Kilari July 20, 2017, 7:41 a.m. UTC | #4 
On Wed, Jul 19, 2017 at 10:48 PM, Julien Grall <julien.grall@arm.com> wrote:
>
>
> On 19/07/17 07:40, Vijay Kilari wrote:
>>
>> On Tue, Jul 18, 2017 at 8:59 PM, Wei Liu <wei.liu2@citrix.com> wrote:
>>>
>>> On Tue, Jul 18, 2017 at 05:11:27PM +0530, vijay.kilari@gmail.com wrote:
>>>>
>>>> From: Vijaya Kumar K <Vijaya.Kumar@cavium.com>
>>>>
>>>> Add accessors for nodes[] and other static variables and
>>>> use those accessors. These variables are later accessed
>>>> outside the file when the code made generic in later
>>>> patches. However the coding style is not changed.
>>>>
>>>> Signed-off-by: Vijaya Kumar K <Vijaya.Kumar@cavium.com>
>>>> ---
>>>> v3: - Changed accessors parameter from int to unsigned int
>>>>     - Updated commit message
>>>>     - Fixed wrong indentation
>>>> ---
>>>>  xen/arch/x86/srat.c | 106
>>>> +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-------------
>>>>  1 file changed, 81 insertions(+), 25 deletions(-)
>>>>
>>>> diff --git a/xen/arch/x86/srat.c b/xen/arch/x86/srat.c
>>>> index 535c9d7..42cca5a 100644
>>>> --- a/xen/arch/x86/srat.c
>>>> +++ b/xen/arch/x86/srat.c
>>>> @@ -41,6 +41,44 @@ static struct node
>>>> node_memblk_range[NR_NODE_MEMBLKS];
>>>>  static nodeid_t memblk_nodeid[NR_NODE_MEMBLKS];
>>>>  static __initdata DECLARE_BITMAP(memblk_hotplug, NR_NODE_MEMBLKS);
>>>>
>>>> +static struct node *get_numa_node(unsigned int id)
>>>> +{
>>>> +     return &nodes[id];
>>>> +}
>>>> +
>>>> +static nodeid_t get_memblk_nodeid(unsigned int id)
>>>> +{
>>>> +     return memblk_nodeid[id];
>>>> +}
>>>> +
>>>> +static nodeid_t *get_memblk_nodeid_map(void)
>>>> +{
>>>> +     return &memblk_nodeid[0];
>>>> +}
>>>> +
>>>> +static struct node *get_node_memblk_range(unsigned int memblk)
>>>> +{
>>>> +     return &node_memblk_range[memblk];
>>>> +}
>>>> +
>>>> +static int get_num_node_memblks(void)
>>>> +{
>>>> +     return num_node_memblks;
>>>> +}
>>>
>>>
>>> They should all be inline functions. And maybe at once lift to a header
>>> and add proper prefix since you mention they are going to be used later.
>>
>>
>> Currently these are static variables in x86/srat.c file.
>> In patch #9 I move them to common/numa.c file and make these functions
>> non-static.
>>
>> If I lift them to header file and make inline, then I have to make these
>> as
>> global variables.
>
>
> As I said on v2, I am not sure to understand the usefulness of those
> accessors over global variables...

These are static variables. To access across other files (arch specific)
these accessors are added. I have to make them global variables to use
outside of this file.

I am happy to make them global and make these accessors static inline
as suggested by Wei.

>
> You don't have any kind of sanity check, so they would do exactly the same
> job. The global variables would avoid so much churn.
>
> More that you tend to sometimes use global and other time static helpers...
>
> Cheers,
>
> --
> Julien Grall
Julien Grall July 20, 2017, 11:03 a.m. UTC | #5 
On 20/07/17 08:41, Vijay Kilari wrote:
> On Wed, Jul 19, 2017 at 10:48 PM, Julien Grall <julien.grall@arm.com> wrote:
>>
>>
>> On 19/07/17 07:40, Vijay Kilari wrote:
>>>
>>> On Tue, Jul 18, 2017 at 8:59 PM, Wei Liu <wei.liu2@citrix.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> On Tue, Jul 18, 2017 at 05:11:27PM +0530, vijay.kilari@gmail.com wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> From: Vijaya Kumar K <Vijaya.Kumar@cavium.com>
>>>>>
>>>>> Add accessors for nodes[] and other static variables and
>>>>> use those accessors. These variables are later accessed
>>>>> outside the file when the code made generic in later
>>>>> patches. However the coding style is not changed.
>>>>>
>>>>> Signed-off-by: Vijaya Kumar K <Vijaya.Kumar@cavium.com>
>>>>> ---
>>>>> v3: - Changed accessors parameter from int to unsigned int
>>>>>     - Updated commit message
>>>>>     - Fixed wrong indentation
>>>>> ---
>>>>>  xen/arch/x86/srat.c | 106
>>>>> +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-------------
>>>>>  1 file changed, 81 insertions(+), 25 deletions(-)
>>>>>
>>>>> diff --git a/xen/arch/x86/srat.c b/xen/arch/x86/srat.c
>>>>> index 535c9d7..42cca5a 100644
>>>>> --- a/xen/arch/x86/srat.c
>>>>> +++ b/xen/arch/x86/srat.c
>>>>> @@ -41,6 +41,44 @@ static struct node
>>>>> node_memblk_range[NR_NODE_MEMBLKS];
>>>>>  static nodeid_t memblk_nodeid[NR_NODE_MEMBLKS];
>>>>>  static __initdata DECLARE_BITMAP(memblk_hotplug, NR_NODE_MEMBLKS);
>>>>>
>>>>> +static struct node *get_numa_node(unsigned int id)
>>>>> +{
>>>>> +     return &nodes[id];
>>>>> +}
>>>>> +
>>>>> +static nodeid_t get_memblk_nodeid(unsigned int id)
>>>>> +{
>>>>> +     return memblk_nodeid[id];
>>>>> +}
>>>>> +
>>>>> +static nodeid_t *get_memblk_nodeid_map(void)
>>>>> +{
>>>>> +     return &memblk_nodeid[0];
>>>>> +}
>>>>> +
>>>>> +static struct node *get_node_memblk_range(unsigned int memblk)
>>>>> +{
>>>>> +     return &node_memblk_range[memblk];
>>>>> +}
>>>>> +
>>>>> +static int get_num_node_memblks(void)
>>>>> +{
>>>>> +     return num_node_memblks;
>>>>> +}
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> They should all be inline functions. And maybe at once lift to a header
>>>> and add proper prefix since you mention they are going to be used later.
>>>
>>>
>>> Currently these are static variables in x86/srat.c file.
>>> In patch #9 I move them to common/numa.c file and make these functions
>>> non-static.
>>>
>>> If I lift them to header file and make inline, then I have to make these
>>> as
>>> global variables.
>>
>>
>> As I said on v2, I am not sure to understand the usefulness of those
>> accessors over global variables...
>
> These are static variables. To access across other files (arch specific)
> these accessors are added. I have to make them global variables to use
> outside of this file.
>
> I am happy to make them global and make these accessors static inline
> as suggested by Wei.

I don't think the helpers are useful... They just return a value without 
any sanity check. You can directly use the global variable in the code.

I would much prefer if you use plain global.

Cheers,
diff mbox

Patch

diff --git a/xen/arch/x86/srat.c b/xen/arch/x86/srat.c
index 535c9d7..42cca5a 100644
--- a/xen/arch/x86/srat.c
+++ b/xen/arch/x86/srat.c
@@ -41,6 +41,44 @@  static struct node node_memblk_range[NR_NODE_MEMBLKS];
 static nodeid_t memblk_nodeid[NR_NODE_MEMBLKS];
 static __initdata DECLARE_BITMAP(memblk_hotplug, NR_NODE_MEMBLKS);
 
+static struct node *get_numa_node(unsigned int id)
+{
+	return &nodes[id];
+}
+
+static nodeid_t get_memblk_nodeid(unsigned int id)
+{
+	return memblk_nodeid[id];
+}
+
+static nodeid_t *get_memblk_nodeid_map(void)
+{
+	return &memblk_nodeid[0];
+}
+
+static struct node *get_node_memblk_range(unsigned int memblk)
+{
+	return &node_memblk_range[memblk];
+}
+
+static int get_num_node_memblks(void)
+{
+	return num_node_memblks;
+}
+
+static int __init numa_add_memblk(nodeid_t nodeid, paddr_t start, uint64_t size)
+{
+	if (nodeid >= NR_NODE_MEMBLKS)
+		return -EINVAL;
+
+	node_memblk_range[num_node_memblks].start = start;
+	node_memblk_range[num_node_memblks].end = start + size;
+	memblk_nodeid[num_node_memblks] = nodeid;
+	num_node_memblks++;
+
+	return 0;
+}
+
 static inline bool node_found(unsigned int idx, unsigned int pxm)
 {
 	return ((pxm2node[idx].pxm == pxm) &&
@@ -107,11 +145,11 @@  int valid_numa_range(paddr_t start, paddr_t end, nodeid_t node)
 {
 	int i;
 
-	for (i = 0; i < num_node_memblks; i++) {
-		struct node *nd = &node_memblk_range[i];
+	for (i = 0; i < get_num_node_memblks(); i++) {
+		struct node *nd = get_node_memblk_range(i);
 
 		if (nd->start <= start && nd->end > end &&
-			memblk_nodeid[i] == node )
+			get_memblk_nodeid(i) == node)
 			return 1;
 	}
 
@@ -122,8 +160,8 @@  static int __init conflicting_memblks(paddr_t start, paddr_t end)
 {
 	int i;
 
-	for (i = 0; i < num_node_memblks; i++) {
-		struct node *nd = &node_memblk_range[i];
+	for (i = 0; i < get_num_node_memblks(); i++) {
+		struct node *nd = get_node_memblk_range(i);
 		if (nd->start == nd->end)
 			continue;
 		if (nd->end > start && nd->start < end)
@@ -136,7 +174,8 @@  static int __init conflicting_memblks(paddr_t start, paddr_t end)
 
 static void __init cutoff_node(nodeid_t i, paddr_t start, paddr_t end)
 {
-	struct node *nd = &nodes[i];
+	struct node *nd = get_numa_node(i);
+
 	if (nd->start < start) {
 		nd->start = start;
 		if (nd->end < nd->start)
@@ -278,6 +317,7 @@  acpi_numa_memory_affinity_init(const struct acpi_srat_mem_affinity *ma)
 	unsigned int pxm;
 	nodeid_t node;
 	int i;
+	struct node *memblk;
 
 	if (srat_disabled())
 		return;
@@ -288,7 +328,7 @@  acpi_numa_memory_affinity_init(const struct acpi_srat_mem_affinity *ma)
 	if (!(ma->flags & ACPI_SRAT_MEM_ENABLED))
 		return;
 
-	if (num_node_memblks >= NR_NODE_MEMBLKS)
+	if (get_num_node_memblks() >= NR_NODE_MEMBLKS)
 	{
 		dprintk(XENLOG_WARNING,
                 "Too many numa entry, try bigger NR_NODE_MEMBLKS \n");
@@ -310,27 +350,31 @@  acpi_numa_memory_affinity_init(const struct acpi_srat_mem_affinity *ma)
 	i = conflicting_memblks(start, end);
 	if (i < 0)
 		/* everything fine */;
-	else if (memblk_nodeid[i] == node) {
+	else if (get_memblk_nodeid(i) == node) {
 		bool mismatch = !(ma->flags & ACPI_SRAT_MEM_HOT_PLUGGABLE) !=
 		                !test_bit(i, memblk_hotplug);
 
+		memblk = get_node_memblk_range(i);
+
 		printk("%sSRAT: PXM %u (%"PRIx64"-%"PRIx64") overlaps with itself (%"PRIx64"-%"PRIx64")\n",
 		       mismatch ? KERN_ERR : KERN_WARNING, pxm, start, end,
-		       node_memblk_range[i].start, node_memblk_range[i].end);
+		       memblk->start, memblk->end);
 		if (mismatch) {
 			bad_srat();
 			return;
 		}
 	} else {
+		memblk = get_node_memblk_range(i);
+
 		printk(KERN_ERR
 		       "SRAT: PXM %u (%"PRIx64"-%"PRIx64") overlaps with PXM %u (%"PRIx64"-%"PRIx64")\n",
-		       pxm, start, end, node_to_pxm(memblk_nodeid[i]),
-		       node_memblk_range[i].start, node_memblk_range[i].end);
+		       pxm, start, end, node_to_pxm(get_memblk_nodeid(i)),
+		       memblk->start, memblk->end);
 		bad_srat();
 		return;
 	}
 	if (!(ma->flags & ACPI_SRAT_MEM_HOT_PLUGGABLE)) {
-		struct node *nd = &nodes[node];
+		struct node *nd = get_numa_node(node);
 
 		if (!node_test_and_set(node, memory_nodes_parsed)) {
 			nd->start = start;
@@ -346,15 +390,17 @@  acpi_numa_memory_affinity_init(const struct acpi_srat_mem_affinity *ma)
 	       node, pxm, start, end,
 	       ma->flags & ACPI_SRAT_MEM_HOT_PLUGGABLE ? " (hotplug)" : "");
 
-	node_memblk_range[num_node_memblks].start = start;
-	node_memblk_range[num_node_memblks].end = end;
-	memblk_nodeid[num_node_memblks] = node;
+	if (numa_add_memblk(node, start, ma->length)) {
+		printk(KERN_ERR "SRAT: node-id %u out of range\n", node);
+		bad_srat();
+		return;
+	}
+
 	if (ma->flags & ACPI_SRAT_MEM_HOT_PLUGGABLE) {
-		__set_bit(num_node_memblks, memblk_hotplug);
+		__set_bit(get_num_node_memblks(), memblk_hotplug);
 		if (end > mem_hotplug)
 			mem_hotplug = end;
 	}
-	num_node_memblks++;
 }
 
 /* Sanity check to catch more bad SRATs (they are amazingly common).
@@ -377,17 +423,21 @@  static int __init nodes_cover_memory(void)
 		do {
 			found = 0;
 			for_each_node_mask(j, memory_nodes_parsed)
-				if (start < nodes[j].end
-				    && end > nodes[j].start) {
-					if (start >= nodes[j].start) {
-						start = nodes[j].end;
+			{
+		                struct node *nd = get_numa_node(j);
+
+				if (start < nd->end
+				    && end > nd->start) {
+					if (start >= nd->start) {
+						start = nd->end;
 						found = 1;
 					}
-					if (end <= nodes[j].end) {
-						end = nodes[j].start;
+					if (end <= nd->end) {
+						end = nd->start;
 						found = 1;
 					}
 				}
+			}
 		} while (found && start < end);
 
 		if (start < end) {
@@ -457,6 +507,8 @@  int __init acpi_scan_nodes(paddr_t start, paddr_t end)
 {
 	unsigned int i;
 	nodemask_t all_nodes_parsed;
+	struct node *memblks;
+	nodeid_t *nodeids;
 
 	/* First clean up the node list */
 	for (i = 0; i < MAX_NUMNODES; i++)
@@ -470,6 +522,8 @@  int __init acpi_scan_nodes(paddr_t start, paddr_t end)
 		return -1;
 	}
 
+	memblks = get_node_memblk_range(0);
+	nodeids = get_memblk_nodeid_map();
 	if (compute_memnode_shift(node_memblk_range, num_node_memblks,
 				  memblk_nodeid)) {
 		memnode_shift = 0;
@@ -484,12 +538,14 @@  int __init acpi_scan_nodes(paddr_t start, paddr_t end)
 	/* Finally register nodes */
 	for_each_node_mask(i, all_nodes_parsed)
 	{
-		uint64_t size = nodes[i].end - nodes[i].start;
+		struct node *nd = get_numa_node(i);
+		uint64_t size = nd->end - nd->start;
+
 		if ( size == 0 )
 			printk(KERN_WARNING "SRAT: Node %u has no memory. "
 			       "BIOS Bug or mis-configured hardware?\n", i);
 
-		setup_node_bootmem(i, nodes[i].start, nodes[i].end);
+		setup_node_bootmem(i, nd->start, nd->end);
 	}
 	for (i = 0; i < nr_cpu_ids; i++) {
 		if (cpu_to_node[i] == NUMA_NO_NODE)