On 07/13/2010 01:20 AM, KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki wrote:
> On Mon, 12 Jul 2010 10:44:10 -0500
> Nathan Fontenot <nf...@austin.ibm.com> wrote:
>
>> This patch moves the register/unregister_memory routines to
>> avoid a forward declaration. It also moves the sysfs file
>> creation and deletion for each directory into the register/
>> unregister routines to avoid duplicating it with these updates.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Nathan Fontenot <nf...@austin.ibm.com>
>> ---
>> drivers/base/memory.c | 93
>> +++++++++++++++++++++++++-------------------------
>> 1 file changed, 48 insertions(+), 45 deletions(-)
>>
>> Index: linux-2.6/drivers/base/memory.c
>> ===================================================================
>> --- linux-2.6.orig/drivers/base/memory.c 2010-07-09 14:23:17.000000000
>> -0500
>> +++ linux-2.6/drivers/base/memory.c 2010-07-09 14:23:20.000000000 -0500
>> @@ -87,31 +87,6 @@
>> EXPORT_SYMBOL(unregister_memory_isolate_notifier);
>>
>> /*
>> - * register_memory - Setup a sysfs device for a memory block
>> - */
>> -static
>> -int register_memory(struct memory_block *memory, struct mem_section
>> *section)
>> -{
>> - int error;
>> -
>> - memory->sysdev.cls = &memory_sysdev_class;
>> - memory->sysdev.id = __section_nr(section);
>> -
>> - error = sysdev_register(&memory->sysdev);
>> - return error;
>> -}
>> -
>> -static void
>> -unregister_memory(struct memory_block *memory)
>> -{
>> - BUG_ON(memory->sysdev.cls != &memory_sysdev_class);
>> -
>> - /* drop the ref. we got in remove_memory_block() */
>> - kobject_put(&memory->sysdev.kobj);
>> - sysdev_unregister(&memory->sysdev);
>> -}
>> -
>> -/*
>> * use this as the physical section index that this memsection
>> * uses.
>> */
>> @@ -346,6 +321,53 @@
>> sysdev_remove_file(&mem->sysdev, &attr_##attr_name)
>>
>> /*
>> + * register_memory - Setup a sysfs device for a memory block
>> + */
>> +static
>> +int register_memory(struct memory_block *memory, struct mem_section
>> *section,
>> + int nid, enum mem_add_context context)
>> +{
>> + int ret;
>> +
>> + memory->sysdev.cls = &memory_sysdev_class;
>> + memory->sysdev.id = __section_nr(section);
>> +
> Why not block-ID but section-ID ?
Using the beginning section id as the id here makes the splitting of
memory_block's easier since we can assume that the id is unique.
>
> -Kame
>
_______________________________________________
Linuxppc-dev mailing list
Linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org
https://lists.ozlabs.org/listinfo/linuxppc-dev
