| lists.openwall.net | lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC | |
|
Open Source and information security mailing list archives
| ||
|
Message-ID: <87ej3yv588.fsf@basil.nowhere.org> Date: Fri, 05 Sep 2008 20:04:55 +0200 From: Andi Kleen <andi@...stfloor.org> To: Gary Hade <garyhade@...ibm.com> Cc: linux-mm@...ck.org, Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>, Yasunori Goto <y-goto@...fujitsu.com>, Badari Pulavarty <pbadari@...ibm.com>, Mel Gorman <mel@....ul.ie>, Chris McDermott <lcm@...ibm.com>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, x86@...nel.org, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu> Subject: Re: [PATCH] [RESEND] x86_64: add memory hotremove config option Gary Hade <garyhade@...ibm.com> writes: > > Add memory hotremove config option to x86_64 > > Memory hotremove functionality can currently be configured into > the ia64, powerpc, and s390 kernels. This patch makes it possible > to configure the memory hotremove functionality into the x86_64 > kernel as well. You forgot to describe how you tested it? Does it actually work. And why do you want to do it it? What's the use case? The general understanding was that it doesn't work very well on a real machine at least because it cannot be controlled how that memory maps to real pluggable hardware (and you cannot completely empty a node at runtime) and a Hypervisor would likely use different interfaces anyways. -Andi -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists