For non-NUMA, it turns out that numa_init_array() has no operations. Make separated definition for non-NUMA and NUMA, so later they can be combined into their counterpart init_cpu_to_node().
Signed-off-by: Pingfan Liu <[email protected]> CC: Thomas Gleixner <[email protected]> CC: Ingo Molnar <[email protected]> CC: Borislav Petkov <[email protected]> CC: "H. Peter Anvin" <[email protected]> CC: Dave Hansen <[email protected]> CC: Vlastimil Babka <[email protected]> CC: Mike Rapoport <[email protected]> CC: Andrew Morton <[email protected]> CC: Mel Gorman <[email protected]> CC: Joonsoo Kim <[email protected]> CC: Andy Lutomirski <[email protected]> CC: Andi Kleen <[email protected]> CC: Petr Tesarik <[email protected]> CC: Michal Hocko <[email protected]> CC: Stephen Rothwell <[email protected]> CC: Jonathan Corbet <[email protected]> CC: Nicholas Piggin <[email protected]> CC: Daniel Vacek <[email protected]> CC: [email protected] --- arch/x86/mm/numa.c | 4 ++++ 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+) diff --git a/arch/x86/mm/numa.c b/arch/x86/mm/numa.c index 1308f54..bfe6732 100644 --- a/arch/x86/mm/numa.c +++ b/arch/x86/mm/numa.c @@ -599,6 +599,7 @@ static int __init numa_register_memblks(struct numa_meminfo *mi) return 0; } +#ifdef CONFIG_NUMA /* * There are unfortunately some poorly designed mainboards around that * only connect memory to a single CPU. This breaks the 1:1 cpu->node @@ -618,6 +619,9 @@ static void __init numa_init_array(void) rr = next_node_in(rr, node_online_map); } } +#else +static void __init numa_init_array(void) {} +#endif static int __init numa_init(int (*init_func)(void)) { -- 2.7.4
