Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH 2/2] x86/NUMA: cleanup

2016-08-16 Thread Dario Faggioli
On Wed, 2016-08-10 at 05:47 -0600, Jan Beulich wrote: > > On 10.08.16 at 12:35, wrote: > > I observe that CONFIG_NUMA_EMU is also unconditionally true, which > > offers further cleanup opportunities (albeit it probably a separate > > patch). > So I thought, but then

Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH 2/2] x86/NUMA: cleanup

2016-08-10 Thread Jan Beulich
>>> On 10.08.16 at 12:35, wrote: > On 10/08/16 10:24, Jan Beulich wrote: >> - drop the only left CONFIG_NUMA conditional (this is always true) > > I observe that CONFIG_NUMA_EMU is also unconditionally true, which > offers further cleanup opportunities (albeit it

Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH 2/2] x86/NUMA: cleanup

2016-08-10 Thread Andrew Cooper
On 10/08/16 10:24, Jan Beulich wrote: > - drop the only left CONFIG_NUMA conditional (this is always true) I observe that CONFIG_NUMA_EMU is also unconditionally true, which offers further cleanup opportunities (albeit it probably a separate patch). > - drop struct node_data's node_id field

[Xen-devel] [PATCH 2/2] x86/NUMA: cleanup

2016-08-10 Thread Jan Beulich
- drop the only left CONFIG_NUMA conditional (this is always true) - drop struct node_data's node_id field (being always equal to the node_data[] array index used) - don't open code node_{start,end}_pfn() nor node_spanned_pages() except when used as lvalues (those could be converted too, but