[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CAHGf_=rzRthh+hpKWAVF9OyL+P_NhFw4y+W-tF3j0zB8pr0QjA@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 28 Jun 2012 01:27:35 -0400
From: KOSAKI Motohiro <kosaki.motohiro@...fujitsu.com>
To: Yasuaki Ishimatsu <isimatu.yasuaki@...fujitsu.com>
Cc: Wen Congyang <wency@...fujitsu.com>, linux-mm@...ck.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linuxppc-dev@...ts.ozlabs.org,
linux-acpi@...r.kernel.org, len.brown@...el.com,
benh@...nel.crashing.org, paulus@...ba.org, cl@...ux.com,
minchan.kim@...il.com, akpm@...ux-foundation.org
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 2/12] memory-hogplug : check memory offline in offline_pages
On Thu, Jun 28, 2012 at 1:06 AM, Yasuaki Ishimatsu
<isimatu.yasuaki@...fujitsu.com> wrote:
> Hi Wen,
>
> 2012/06/27 17:49, Wen Congyang wrote:
>> At 06/27/2012 01:44 PM, Yasuaki Ishimatsu Wrote:
>>> When offline_pages() is called to offlined memory, the function fails since
>>> all memory has been offlined. In this case, the function should succeed.
>>> The patch adds the check function into offline_pages().
>>
>> You miss such case: some pages are online, while some pages are offline.
>> offline_pages() will fail too in such case.
>
> You are right. But current code fails, when the function is called to offline
> memory. In this case, the function should succeed. So the patch confirms
> whether the memory was offlined or not. And if memory has already been
> offlined, offline_pages return 0.
Can you please explain why the caller can't check it? I hope to avoid
an ignorance
as far as we can.
--
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