[PATCH v4 11/26] x86/numa: use get_pfn_range_for_nid to verify that node spans memory

[Mike Rapoport]

From: "Mike Rapoport (Microsoft)" <rppt at kernel.org>

Instead of looping over numa_meminfo array to detect node's start and
end addresses use get_pfn_range_for_init().

This is shorter and make it easier to lift numa_memblks to generic code.

Signed-off-by: Mike Rapoport (Microsoft) <rppt at kernel.org>
Tested-by: Zi Yan <ziy at nvidia.com> # for x86_64 and arm64
Reviewed-by: Jonathan Cameron <Jonathan.Cameron at huawei.com>
Tested-by: Jonathan Cameron <Jonathan.Cameron at huawei.com> [arm64 + CXL via QEMU]
Acked-by: Dan Williams <dan.j.williams at intel.com>
Acked-by: David Hildenbrand <david at redhat.com>
---
 arch/x86/mm/numa.c | 17 +++++++----------
 1 file changed, 7 insertions(+), 10 deletions(-)

diff --git a/arch/x86/mm/numa.c b/arch/x86/mm/numa.c
index edfc38803779..30b0ec801b02 100644
--- a/arch/x86/mm/numa.c
+++ b/arch/x86/mm/numa.c
@@ -521,17 +521,14 @@ static int __init numa_register_memblks(struct numa_meminfo *mi)
 
 	/* Finally register nodes. */
 	for_each_node_mask(nid, node_possible_map) {
-		u64 start = PFN_PHYS(max_pfn);
-		u64 end = 0;
+		unsigned long start_pfn, end_pfn;
 
-		for (i = 0; i < mi->nr_blks; i++) {
-			if (nid != mi->blk[i].nid)
-				continue;
-			start = min(mi->blk[i].start, start);
-			end = max(mi->blk[i].end, end);
-		}
-
-		if (start >= end)
+		/*
+		 * Note, get_pfn_range_for_nid() depends on
+		 * memblock_set_node() having already happened
+		 */
+		get_pfn_range_for_nid(nid, &start_pfn, &end_pfn);
+		if (start_pfn >= end_pfn)
 			continue;
 
 		alloc_node_data(nid);
-- 
2.43.0