On 10/08/2014 10:57 AM, Prarit Bhargava wrote:
>>      node = adf_get_dev_node_id(pdev);
> ^^^ I don't think you should ever make this call.  IMO it is wrong to do it 
> that
> way.  Just stick with
> 
>       node = dev_to_node(&pdev->dev)
> 
> as the line below forces a default to that anyway.

But then how do I know which node I'm physically connected to?

> 
>> > +  if (node != dev_to_node(&pdev->dev) && dev_to_node(&pdev->dev) > 0) {
>> > +          /* If the accelerator is connected to a node with no memory
>> > +           * there is no point in using the accelerator since the remote
>> > +           * memory transaction will be very slow. */
>> > +          dev_err(&pdev->dev, "Invalid NUMA configuration.\n");
>> > +          return -EINVAL;
> Hmm ... I wonder if it would be safe to do
> 
>       /* force allocations to node 0 */
>       node = 0;
>       dev_err(&pdev->dev, "Invalid NUMA configuration detected, node id = %d .
> Defaulting node to 0.  \n",
>                 node);
> 
> and then continue?

As the comment say there is no point continuing if the configuration is
wrong. Defaulting to 0 will cause the same panic you pointed out in your
first patch if node 0 has no memory.

> 
> And maybe even a FW_WARN of some sort here might be appropriate to indicate 
> that
> something is wrong with the mapping?  In any case a better error message is a
> always good idea IMO.

--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-crypto" in
the body of a message to [email protected]
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html

Reply via email to