[v3,20/26] mm: numa_memblks: introduce numa_memblks_init

Commit Message

Mike Rapoport Aug. 1, 2024, 6:08 a.m. UTC

From: "Mike Rapoport (Microsoft)" <[e-mail]>

Move most of x86::numa_init() to numa_memblks so that the latter will be
more self-contained.

With this numa_memblk data structures should not be exposed to the
architecture specific code.

Signed-off-by: Mike Rapoport (Microsoft) <[e-mail]>
Tested-by: Zi Yan <[e-mail]> # for x86_64 and arm64
---
 arch/x86/mm/numa.c           | 40 ++++-------------------------------
 include/linux/numa_memblks.h |  3 +++
 mm/numa_memblks.c            | 41 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
 3 files changed, 48 insertions(+), 36 deletions(-)

Comments

Jonathan Cameron Aug. 2, 2024, 11:08 a.m. UTC | #1

On Thu,  1 Aug 2024 09:08:20 +0300
Mike Rapoport <[e-mail]> wrote:

> From: "Mike Rapoport (Microsoft)" <[e-mail]>
> 
> Move most of x86::numa_init() to numa_memblks so that the latter will be
> more self-contained.
> 
> With this numa_memblk data structures should not be exposed to the
> architecture specific code.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Mike Rapoport (Microsoft) <[e-mail]>
> Tested-by: Zi Yan <[e-mail]> # for x86_64 and arm64

Just code motion as expected.

Reviewed-by: Jonathan Cameron <[e-mail]>

David Hildenbrand Aug. 6, 2024, 1:21 p.m. UTC | #2

On 01.08.24 08:08, Mike Rapoport wrote:
> From: "Mike Rapoport (Microsoft)" <[e-mail]>
> 
> Move most of x86::numa_init() to numa_memblks so that the latter will be
> more self-contained.
> 
> With this numa_memblk data structures should not be exposed to the
> architecture specific code.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Mike Rapoport (Microsoft) <[e-mail]>
> Tested-by: Zi Yan <[e-mail]> # for x86_64 and arm64
> ---

Acked-by: David Hildenbrand <[e-mail]>

Patch

diff --git a/arch/x86/mm/numa.c b/arch/x86/mm/numa.c
index 8eb15578625e..16bc703c9272 100644
--- a/arch/x86/mm/numa.c
+++ b/arch/x86/mm/numa.c
@@ -115,13 +115,9 @@  void __init setup_node_to_cpumask_map(void)
 	pr_debug("Node to cpumask map for %u nodes\n", nr_node_ids);
 }
 
-static int __init numa_register_memblks(struct numa_meminfo *mi)
+static int __init numa_register_nodes(void)
 {
-	int nid, err;
-
-	err = numa_register_meminfo(mi);
-	if (err)
-		return err;
+	int nid;
 
 	if (!memblock_validate_numa_coverage(SZ_1M))
 		return -EINVAL;
@@ -171,39 +167,11 @@  static int __init numa_init(int (*init_func)(void))
 	for (i = 0; i < MAX_LOCAL_APIC; i++)
 		set_apicid_to_node(i, NUMA_NO_NODE);
 
-	nodes_clear(numa_nodes_parsed);
-	nodes_clear(node_possible_map);
-	nodes_clear(node_online_map);
-	memset(&numa_meminfo, 0, sizeof(numa_meminfo));
-	WARN_ON(memblock_set_node(0, ULLONG_MAX, &memblock.memory,
-				  NUMA_NO_NODE));
-	WARN_ON(memblock_set_node(0, ULLONG_MAX, &memblock.reserved,
-				  NUMA_NO_NODE));
-	/* In case that parsing SRAT failed. */
-	WARN_ON(memblock_clear_hotplug(0, ULLONG_MAX));
-	numa_reset_distance();
-
-	ret = init_func();
+	ret = numa_memblks_init(init_func, /* memblock_force_top_down */ true);
 	if (ret < 0)
 		return ret;
 
-	/*
-	 * We reset memblock back to the top-down direction
-	 * here because if we configured ACPI_NUMA, we have
-	 * parsed SRAT in init_func(). It is ok to have the
-	 * reset here even if we did't configure ACPI_NUMA
-	 * or acpi numa init fails and fallbacks to dummy
-	 * numa init.
-	 */
-	memblock_set_bottom_up(false);
-
-	ret = numa_cleanup_meminfo(&numa_meminfo);
-	if (ret < 0)
-		return ret;
-
-	numa_emulation(&numa_meminfo, numa_distance_cnt);
-
-	ret = numa_register_memblks(&numa_meminfo);
+	ret = numa_register_nodes();
 	if (ret < 0)
 		return ret;
 
diff --git a/include/linux/numa_memblks.h b/include/linux/numa_memblks.h
index f81f98678074..07381320848f 100644
--- a/include/linux/numa_memblks.h
+++ b/include/linux/numa_memblks.h
@@ -34,6 +34,9 @@  int __init numa_register_meminfo(struct numa_meminfo *mi);
 void __init numa_nodemask_from_meminfo(nodemask_t *nodemask,
 				       const struct numa_meminfo *mi);
 
+int __init numa_memblks_init(int (*init_func)(void),
+			     bool memblock_force_top_down);
+
 #ifdef CONFIG_NUMA_EMU
 int numa_emu_cmdline(char *str);
 void __init numa_emu_update_cpu_to_node(int *emu_nid_to_phys,
diff --git a/mm/numa_memblks.c b/mm/numa_memblks.c
index e3c3519725d4..7749b6f6b250 100644
--- a/mm/numa_memblks.c
+++ b/mm/numa_memblks.c
@@ -415,6 +415,47 @@  int __init numa_register_meminfo(struct numa_meminfo *mi)
 	return 0;
 }
 
+int __init numa_memblks_init(int (*init_func)(void),
+			     bool memblock_force_top_down)
+{
+	int ret;
+
+	nodes_clear(numa_nodes_parsed);
+	nodes_clear(node_possible_map);
+	nodes_clear(node_online_map);
+	memset(&numa_meminfo, 0, sizeof(numa_meminfo));
+	WARN_ON(memblock_set_node(0, ULLONG_MAX, &memblock.memory,
+				  NUMA_NO_NODE));
+	WARN_ON(memblock_set_node(0, ULLONG_MAX, &memblock.reserved,
+				  NUMA_NO_NODE));
+	/* In case that parsing SRAT failed. */
+	WARN_ON(memblock_clear_hotplug(0, ULLONG_MAX));
+	numa_reset_distance();
+
+	ret = init_func();
+	if (ret < 0)
+		return ret;
+
+	/*
+	 * We reset memblock back to the top-down direction
+	 * here because if we configured ACPI_NUMA, we have
+	 * parsed SRAT in init_func(). It is ok to have the
+	 * reset here even if we did't configure ACPI_NUMA
+	 * or acpi numa init fails and fallbacks to dummy
+	 * numa init.
+	 */
+	if (memblock_force_top_down)
+		memblock_set_bottom_up(false);
+
+	ret = numa_cleanup_meminfo(&numa_meminfo);
+	if (ret < 0)
+		return ret;
+
+	numa_emulation(&numa_meminfo, numa_distance_cnt);
+
+	return numa_register_meminfo(&numa_meminfo);
+}
+
 static int __init cmp_memblk(const void *a, const void *b)
 {
 	const struct numa_memblk *ma = *(const struct numa_memblk **)a;