Hi, linux-mm folks:
Can somebody help me to review this patch?
I ran scripts/get_maintainer.pl -f mm/memblock.c and
scripts/get_maintainer.pl -f mm/, but
the results showed me that there is no maintainer.
To understand this patch should also read patch 11.
On 2016/9/1 14:55, Zhen Lei wrote:
> If HAVE_MEMORYLESS_NODES is selected, and some memoryless numa nodes are
> actually exist. The percpu variable areas and numa control blocks of that
> memoryless numa nodes must be allocated from the nearest available node
> to improve performance.
>
> Signed-off-by: Zhen Lei <thunder.leiz...@huawei.com>
> ---
> include/linux/memblock.h | 1 +
> mm/memblock.c | 28 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> 2 files changed, 29 insertions(+)
>
> diff --git a/include/linux/memblock.h b/include/linux/memblock.h
> index 2925da2..8e866e0 100644
> --- a/include/linux/memblock.h
> +++ b/include/linux/memblock.h
> @@ -290,6 +290,7 @@ static inline int memblock_get_region_node(const struct
> memblock_region *r)
>
> phys_addr_t memblock_alloc_nid(phys_addr_t size, phys_addr_t align, int nid);
> phys_addr_t memblock_alloc_try_nid(phys_addr_t size, phys_addr_t align, int
> nid);
> +phys_addr_t memblock_alloc_near_nid(phys_addr_t size, phys_addr_t align, int
> nid);
>
> phys_addr_t memblock_alloc(phys_addr_t size, phys_addr_t align);
>
> diff --git a/mm/memblock.c b/mm/memblock.c
> index 483197e..6578fff 100644
> --- a/mm/memblock.c
> +++ b/mm/memblock.c
> @@ -1189,6 +1189,34 @@ again:
> return ret;
> }
>
> +phys_addr_t __init memblock_alloc_near_nid(phys_addr_t size, phys_addr_t
> align, int nid)
> +{
> + int i, best_nid, distance;
> + u64 pa;
> + DECLARE_BITMAP(nodes_map, MAX_NUMNODES);
> +
> + bitmap_zero(nodes_map, MAX_NUMNODES);
> +
> +find_nearest_node:
> + best_nid = NUMA_NO_NODE;
> + distance = INT_MAX;
> +
> + for_each_clear_bit(i, nodes_map, MAX_NUMNODES)
> + if (node_distance(nid, i) < distance) {
> + best_nid = i;
> + distance = node_distance(nid, i);
> + }
> +
> + pa = memblock_alloc_nid(size, align, best_nid);
> + if (!pa) {
> + BUG_ON(best_nid == NUMA_NO_NODE);
> + bitmap_set(nodes_map, best_nid, 1);
> + goto find_nearest_node;
> + }
> +
> + return pa;
> +}
> +
> phys_addr_t __init __memblock_alloc_base(phys_addr_t size, phys_addr_t
> align, phys_addr_t max_addr)
> {
> return memblock_alloc_base_nid(size, align, max_addr, NUMA_NO_NODE,
> --
> 2.5.0
>
>
>
> .
>
