Re: gpio-ml-ioh: Support interrupt function

[Tomoya MORINAGA]

(2011/10/18 14:56), David Rientjes wrote:
> On Tue, 18 Oct 2011, Tomoya MORINAGA wrote:
>
> > > The linux-next patch 54be566317b6 "gpio-ml-ioh: Support interrupt
> > > function" generates a Sparse warning.
> > >
> > > +               irq_base = irq_alloc_descs(-1, IOH_IRQ_BASE, num_ports[j],
> > > +                                          GFP_KERNEL);
> > >                                              ^^^^^^^^^^
> > >
> > > The last argument should be a NUMA node, not a GFP_ flag.  I'm not
> > > sure what the right fix is.  There are currently 5 callers in my
> > > cscope for this function in linux-next.
> > >
> > > 2 pass GFP_KERNEL which is wrong.
>
> Right, all irq_alloc_descs() allocations are already implicitly
> GFP_KERNEL.
>
> > > 2 pass 0 which maybe should be cpu_to_node(0)?
> > > 1 passes -1 which maybe could be NUMA_NO_NODE?
> > I can understand your saying.
> > Seeing accepted other drivers, '0' or '-1' is used.
>
> There's actually no guarantee in the kernel that node 0 has memory, so
> unless that is assured in the context then passing 0 would be wrong.
>
> > Focusing on GPIO driver, gpio-pca953x.c uses '-1'.
>
> The slab layer guarantees that passing -1 will allocate on the node that
> is local to the cpu that the code is running on.  Unless there's a
> compelling reason to allocate on a different node, then this is what you
> want to use.
>
> We try not to pass -1 directly, though, we try to use NUMA_NO_NODE
> wherever possible.
> --

Using NUMA_NO_NODE, I confirmed our gpio(gpio-pch) works well.
I will submit the patch both gpio-pch and gpio-ml-ioh soon.

thanks,
--
tomoya
ROHM Co., Ltd.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/