[v4,11/26] x86/numa: use get_pfn_range_for_nid to verify that node spans memory

Commit Message

Mike Rapoport Aug. 7, 2024, 6:40 a.m. UTC

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

Instead of looping over numa_meminfo array to detect node's start and
end addresses use get_pfn_range_for_init().

This is shorter and make it easier to lift numa_memblks to generic code.

Signed-off-by: Mike Rapoport (Microsoft) <[e-mail]>
Tested-by: Zi Yan <[e-mail]> # for x86_64 and arm64
Reviewed-by: Jonathan Cameron <[e-mail]>
Tested-by: Jonathan Cameron <[e-mail]> [arm64 + CXL via QEMU]
Acked-by: Dan Williams <[e-mail]>
Acked-by: David Hildenbrand <[e-mail]>
---
 arch/x86/mm/numa.c | 17 +++++++----------
 1 file changed, 7 insertions(+), 10 deletions(-)

Patch

diff --git a/arch/x86/mm/numa.c b/arch/x86/mm/numa.c
index edfc38803779..30b0ec801b02 100644
--- a/arch/x86/mm/numa.c
+++ b/arch/x86/mm/numa.c
@@ -521,17 +521,14 @@  static int __init numa_register_memblks(struct numa_meminfo *mi)
 
 	/* Finally register nodes. */
 	for_each_node_mask(nid, node_possible_map) {
-		u64 start = PFN_PHYS(max_pfn);
-		u64 end = 0;
+		unsigned long start_pfn, end_pfn;
 
-		for (i = 0; i < mi->nr_blks; i++) {
-			if (nid != mi->blk[i].nid)
-				continue;
-			start = min(mi->blk[i].start, start);
-			end = max(mi->blk[i].end, end);
-		}
-
-		if (start >= end)
+		/*
+		 * Note, get_pfn_range_for_nid() depends on
+		 * memblock_set_node() having already happened
+		 */
+		get_pfn_range_for_nid(nid, &start_pfn, &end_pfn);
+		if (start_pfn >= end_pfn)
 			continue;
 
 		alloc_node_data(nid);