[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index] Re: [XEN RFC PATCH 25/40] xen/arm: unified entry to parse all NUMA data from device tree
On Wed, 11 Aug 2021, Wei Chen wrote: > In this API, we scan whole device tree to parse CPU node id, memory > node id and distance-map. Though early_scan_node will invoke has a > handler to process memory nodes. If we want to parse memory node id > in this handler, we have to embeded NUMA parse code in this handler. > But we still need to scan whole device tree to find CPU NUMA id and > distance-map. In this case, we include memory NUMA id parse in this > API too. Another benefit is that we have a unique entry for device > tree NUMA data parse. > > Signed-off-by: Wei Chen <wei.chen@xxxxxxx> > --- > xen/arch/arm/numa_device_tree.c | 31 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++--- > xen/include/asm-arm/numa.h | 1 + > 2 files changed, 29 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/xen/arch/arm/numa_device_tree.c b/xen/arch/arm/numa_device_tree.c > index 6e0d1d3d9f..27ffb72f7b 100644 > --- a/xen/arch/arm/numa_device_tree.c > +++ b/xen/arch/arm/numa_device_tree.c > @@ -131,7 +131,8 @@ save_memblk: > } > > /* Parse CPU NUMA node info */ > -int __init device_tree_parse_numa_cpu_node(const void *fdt, int node) > +static int __init > +device_tree_parse_numa_cpu_node(const void *fdt, int node) > { > uint32_t nid; > > @@ -147,7 +148,7 @@ int __init device_tree_parse_numa_cpu_node(const void > *fdt, int node) > } > > /* Parse memory node NUMA info */ > -int __init > +static int __init > device_tree_parse_numa_memory_node(const void *fdt, int node, > const char *name, uint32_t addr_cells, uint32_t size_cells) > { > @@ -202,7 +203,7 @@ device_tree_parse_numa_memory_node(const void *fdt, int > node, > } > > /* Parse NUMA distance map v1 */ > -int __init > +static int __init > device_tree_parse_numa_distance_map_v1(const void *fdt, int node) > { > const struct fdt_property *prop; > @@ -267,3 +268,27 @@ device_tree_parse_numa_distance_map_v1(const void *fdt, > int node) > > return 0; > } > + > +static int __init fdt_scan_numa_nodes(const void *fdt, > + int node, const char *uname, int depth, > + u32 address_cells, u32 size_cells, void *data) > +{ > + int ret = 0; > + > + if ( fdt_node_check_type(fdt, node, "cpu") == 0 ) > + ret = device_tree_parse_numa_cpu_node(fdt, node); > + else if ( fdt_node_check_type(fdt, node, "memory") == 0 ) > + ret = device_tree_parse_numa_memory_node(fdt, node, uname, > + address_cells, size_cells); > + else if ( fdt_node_check_compatible(fdt, node, > + "numa-distance-map-v1") == 0 ) > + ret = device_tree_parse_numa_distance_map_v1(fdt, node); > + > + return ret; > +} Julien, do you have an opinion on whether it might be worth reusing the existing early_scan_node function for this to avoiding another full FDT scan (to avoid another call to device_tree_for_each_node)?
|
![]() |
Lists.xenproject.org is hosted with RackSpace, monitoring our |