[PATCH 1/2] Unify numa_memory_lookup_table allocation and setup.

gsbarb at br.ibm.com gsbarb at br.ibm.com
Thu Sep 29 10:05:25 EST 2005

Dave Hansen <haveblue at us.ibm.com> wrote on 28/09/2005 17:44:18:

> On Wed, 2005-09-28 at 15:10 -0300, Gustavo Sverzut Barbieri wrote:
> > Here are some patches to clean up lmb.c, numa.c and init.c, as 
requested by 
> > Dave Hansen.
> Let me elaborate a bit.  I created _another_ loop to run through all of
> the LMBs in the NUMA init code a few weeks back for memory_present()
> calls.  I thought this this is a decent way to atone for that messy
> code.
> This first patch is a pretty simple cleanup.
> The LMB macro patch certainly makes some of the code more readable.
> But, it might not be worth it to use the macro in lmb.c.  It just seems
> to make it more complicated.  Any thoughts?

I could use that macro just where it loops from 0 to "cnt", with that we 
can leave the _reversed() version out and leave coalesce and the other one 
unchanged. Maybe leave the _reversed() (it's used in 2 places).

PS: If this mail doesn't respect any internet standards, it's because it 
was sent by Lotus Notes. Sorry, my imap account is still in progress!

Cheers from Brazil,

Gustavo Sverzut Barbieri
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://ozlabs.org/pipermail/linuxppc64-dev/attachments/20050928/26462a3c/attachment.htm 

More information about the Linuxppc64-dev mailing list