Re: [PATCH 3/3] arm64/numa: fix type info

2016-05-26 Thread Leizhen (ThunderTown)
On 2016/5/27 1:12, David Daney wrote: > The current patch to correct this problem is here: > > https://lkml.org/lkml/2016/5/24/679 > > Since v7 of the ACPI/NUMA patches are likely going to be added to linux-next > as soon as the current merge window ends, further simplifications of the >

Re: [PATCH 3/3] arm64/numa: fix type info

2016-05-26 Thread Leizhen (ThunderTown)
On 2016/5/27 1:12, David Daney wrote: > The current patch to correct this problem is here: > > https://lkml.org/lkml/2016/5/24/679 > > Since v7 of the ACPI/NUMA patches are likely going to be added to linux-next > as soon as the current merge window ends, further simplifications of the >

Re: [PATCH 3/3] arm64/numa: fix type info

2016-05-26 Thread David Daney
The current patch to correct this problem is here: https://lkml.org/lkml/2016/5/24/679 Since v7 of the ACPI/NUMA patches are likely going to be added to linux-next as soon as the current merge window ends, further simplifications of the informational prints should probably be rebased on top

Re: [PATCH 3/3] arm64/numa: fix type info

2016-05-26 Thread David Daney
The current patch to correct this problem is here: https://lkml.org/lkml/2016/5/24/679 Since v7 of the ACPI/NUMA patches are likely going to be added to linux-next as soon as the current merge window ends, further simplifications of the informational prints should probably be rebased on top

Re: [PATCH 3/3] arm64/numa: fix type info

2016-05-26 Thread Joe Perches
On Thu, 2016-05-26 at 09:22 -0700, Ganapatrao Kulkarni wrote: > On Wed, May 25, 2016 at 7:43 PM, Zhen Lei wrote: > > numa_init(of_numa_init) may returned error because of numa configuration > > error. So "No NUMA configuration found" is inaccurate. In fact, specific >

Re: [PATCH 3/3] arm64/numa: fix type info

2016-05-26 Thread Joe Perches
On Thu, 2016-05-26 at 09:22 -0700, Ganapatrao Kulkarni wrote: > On Wed, May 25, 2016 at 7:43 PM, Zhen Lei wrote: > > numa_init(of_numa_init) may returned error because of numa configuration > > error. So "No NUMA configuration found" is inaccurate. In fact, specific > > configuration error

Re: [PATCH 3/3] arm64/numa: fix type info

2016-05-26 Thread Ganapatrao Kulkarni
On Wed, May 25, 2016 at 7:43 PM, Zhen Lei wrote: > numa_init(of_numa_init) may returned error because of numa configuration > error. So "No NUMA configuration found" is inaccurate. In fact, specific > configuration error information can be immediately printed by the >

Re: [PATCH 3/3] arm64/numa: fix type info

2016-05-26 Thread Ganapatrao Kulkarni
On Wed, May 25, 2016 at 7:43 PM, Zhen Lei wrote: > numa_init(of_numa_init) may returned error because of numa configuration > error. So "No NUMA configuration found" is inaccurate. In fact, specific > configuration error information can be immediately printed by the > testing branch. So "No

[PATCH 3/3] arm64/numa: fix type info

2016-05-25 Thread Zhen Lei
numa_init(of_numa_init) may returned error because of numa configuration error. So "No NUMA configuration found" is inaccurate. In fact, specific configuration error information can be immediately printed by the testing branch. So "No NUMA..." only needs to be printed when numa_off.

[PATCH 3/3] arm64/numa: fix type info

2016-05-25 Thread Zhen Lei
numa_init(of_numa_init) may returned error because of numa configuration error. So "No NUMA configuration found" is inaccurate. In fact, specific configuration error information can be immediately printed by the testing branch. So "No NUMA..." only needs to be printed when numa_off.