-----Original Message-----
> On 03/10/2021 09:17 AM, HAGIO KAZUHITO(萩尾 一仁) wrote:
> > -----Original Message-----
> >> Hi, Vincent
> >> Thank you for your reply and suggestion.
> >>
> >>
> >> On 02/10/2021 09:59 PM, Vincent Whitchurch wrote:
> >>
> >>
> >> On Tue, Jan 26, 2021 at 12:13:31PM +0100, Youling Tang wrote:
> >>
> >> "__node_data" instead of "node_data" is used in the MIPS
> >> architecture,
> >> so "__node_data" is used to replace "node_data" to improve the
> >> use of
> >> next_online_pgdat() functions in the MIPS architecture.
> >>
> >>
> >> On my 32-bit MIPS dumps, MEMORY: works properly without this patch, but
> >> they have contig_page_data instead of __node_data/node_data so they
> >>
> >> When the node_data/__node_data and pgdat_list symbols cannot be
> >> successfully
> >> read from the kernel symbols, the contig_page_data symbol will be read. In
> >> your 32-bit machine, there should be no node_data/__node_data, pgdat_list
> >> symbols, and a single node, so the memory size can be displayed normally
> >> without this patch.
> >>
> >>
> >> shouldn't be affected by this code. AFAICS only mach-loongson64 and
> >> mach-ip27 have __node_data.
> >>
> >>
> >> Yes, only mach-loongson64 and mach-ip27 use __node_data in the MIPS
> >> architecture.
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> E.g. Without this patch:
> >> ...
> >> MEMORY: 0
> >> ...
> >>
> >>
> >> With this patch:
> >> ...
> >> MEMORY: 7.5 GB
> >> ...
> >>
> >> Signed-off-by: Huacai Chen <chenhua...@loongson.cn>
> >> <mailto:chenhua...@loongson.cn>
> >> Signed-off-by: Youling Tang <tangyoul...@loongson.cn>
> >> <mailto:tangyoul...@loongson.cn>
> >> ---
> >> memory.c | 28 ++++++++++++++++++----------
> >> 1 file changed, 18 insertions(+), 10 deletions(-)
> >>
> >> diff --git a/memory.c b/memory.c
> >> index 33b0ca7..5347958 100644
> >> --- a/memory.c
> >> +++ b/memory.c
> >> @@ -17820,22 +17820,28 @@ next_online_pgdat(int node)
> >> char buf[BUFSIZE];
> >> ulong pgdat;
> >>
> >> +#ifndef __mips__
> >> +#define NODE_DATA_VAR "node_data"
> >> +#else
> >> +#define NODE_DATA_VAR "__node_data"
> >> +#endif
> >>
> >>
> >> Is this really correct? Doesn't __mips__ check the host architecture
> >> when what we want to check here is the target?
> >>
> >> The results of filtering in the kernel code are as follows :
> >> # grep -wnr "EXPORT_SYMBOL(node_data)"
> >> arch/alpha/mm/numa.c:23:EXPORT_SYMBOL(node_data);
> >> arch/arc/mm/init.c:37:EXPORT_SYMBOL(node_data);
> >> arch/sparc/mm/init_64.c:1106:EXPORT_SYMBOL(node_data);
> >> arch/powerpc/mm/numa.c:52:EXPORT_SYMBOL(node_data);
> >> arch/s390/kernel/numa.c:18:EXPORT_SYMBOL(node_data);
> >> arch/arm64/mm/numa.c:20:EXPORT_SYMBOL(node_data);
> >> arch/x86/mm/numa.c:26:EXPORT_SYMBOL(node_data);
> >>
> >> # grep -wnr "EXPORT_SYMBOL(__node_data)"
> >> arch/mips/sgi-ip27/ip27-memory.c:38:EXPORT_SYMBOL(__node_data);
> >> arch/mips/loongson64/numa.c:33:EXPORT_SYMBOL(__node_data);
> >>
> >>
> >> In the MIPS architecture, no platform uses node_data, only the __node_data
> >> symbol. All other architectures use node_data symbols, so it should be
> >> feasible to use __mips__ to determine the target (as long as it is a MIPS
> >> architecture, use __node_data instead of node_data).
> > OK. Could you add a code comment about this to avoid confusion?
> Ok. I will add the following comment, you see if it is feasible.
The sgi-ip27 is mips32, isn't it?
then please add "the mips32 and mips64 architecutres".
Thanks,
Kazu
>
> --- a/memory.c
> +++ b/memory.c
> @@ -17821,7 +17821,10 @@ next_online_pgdat(int node)
> {
> char buf[BUFSIZE];
> ulong pgdat;
>
> +/*
> + * "__node_data" is used in the mips architecture,
> + * and "node_data" is used in other architectures.
> + */
> #ifndef __mips__
> #define NODE_DATA_VAR "node_data"
> #else
>
> Thanks,
> Youling
> >
> > Thanks,
> > Kazu
--
Crash-utility mailing list
Crash-utility@redhat.com
https://listman.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/crash-utility
