Re: [2/3] add memory present for ppc64

[Olof Johansson <olof@lixom.net>]

On Wed, May 04, 2005 at 09:29:57PM +0100, Andy Whitcroft wrote:

> diff -X /home/apw/brief/lib/vdiff.excl -rupN reference/arch/ppc64/Kconfig current/arch/ppc64/Kconfig
> --- reference/arch/ppc64/Kconfig	2005-05-04 20:54:50.000000000 +0100
> +++ current/arch/ppc64/Kconfig	2005-05-04 20:54:50.000000000 +0100
> @@ -212,8 +212,8 @@ config ARCH_FLATMEM_ENABLE
>  source "mm/Kconfig"
>  
>  config HAVE_ARCH_EARLY_PFN_TO_NID
> -	bool
> -	default y
> +	def_bool y
> +	depends on NEED_MULTIPLE_NODES

Ok, time to show my lack of undestanding here, but when can we ever be
CONFIG_NUMA and NOT need multiple nodes?

> @@ -481,6 +483,7 @@ static void __init setup_nonnuma(void)
>  
>  	for (i = 0 ; i < top_of_ram; i += MEMORY_INCREMENT)
>  		numa_memory_lookup_table[i >> MEMORY_INCREMENT_SHIFT] = 0;
> +	memory_present(0, 0, init_node_data[0].node_end_pfn);

Isn't the memory_present stuff and numa_memory_lookup_table two
implementations doing the same thing (mapping memory to nodes)?
Can we kill numa_memory_lookup_table with this?


-Olof
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/