>>> <vijay.kil...@gmail.com> 03/28/17 5:55 PM >>> > --- a/xen/arch/x86/numa.c > +++ b/xen/arch/x86/numa.c > @@ -42,12 +42,27 @@ cpumask_t __read_mostly node_to_cpumask[MAX_NUMNODES]; > > nodemask_t __read_mostly node_online_map = { { [0] = 1UL } }; > > -bool numa_off = 0; > -s8 acpi_numa = 0; > +static bool numa_off = 0; > +static bool acpi_numa = 1; > > -int srat_disabled(void) > +bool is_numa_off(void)
numa_enabled() (or less desirably numa_disabled()) > +bool get_acpi_numa(void) acpi_numa_enabled() then perhaps. Iirc Julien has already commented on the non-boolean nature of acpi_numa. > @@ -202,13 +217,17 @@ void __init numa_init_array(void) > > #ifdef CONFIG_NUMA_EMU > static int __initdata numa_fake = 0; > +static int get_numa_fake(void) > +{ > + return numa_fake; > +} I don't see the point of having static accessors for static variables. Even if the accessor became non-static, I'd expect it to be used only in other translation units. Jan _______________________________________________ Xen-devel mailing list Xen-devel@lists.xen.org https://lists.xen.org/xen-devel