linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 6/6] mem-hotplug: Introduce movablenode boot option

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

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <5241B8FA.1030004@gmail.com>
Date:	Wed, 25 Sep 2013 00:08:26 +0800
From:	Zhang Yanfei <zhangyanfei.yes@...il.com>
To:	Toshi Kani <toshi.kani@...com>
CC:	Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>,
	Zhang Yanfei <zhangyanfei@...fujitsu.com>,
	"Rafael J . Wysocki" <rjw@...k.pl>, lenb@...nel.org,
	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>, mingo@...e.hu,
	"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
	Wanpeng Li <liwanp@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
	Thomas Renninger <trenn@...e.de>,
	Yinghai Lu <yinghai@...nel.org>,
	Jiang Liu <jiang.liu@...wei.com>,
	Wen Congyang <wency@...fujitsu.com>,
	Lai Jiangshan <laijs@...fujitsu.com>,
	isimatu.yasuaki@...fujitsu.com, izumi.taku@...fujitsu.com,
	Mel Gorman <mgorman@...e.de>, Minchan Kim <minchan@...nel.org>,
	mina86@...a86.com, gong.chen@...ux.intel.com,
	vasilis.liaskovitis@...fitbricks.com, lwoodman@...hat.com,
	Rik van Riel <riel@...hat.com>, jweiner@...hat.com,
	prarit@...hat.com, "x86@...nel.org" <x86@...nel.org>,
	linux-doc@...r.kernel.org,
	"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	Linux MM <linux-mm@...ck.org>, linux-acpi@...r.kernel.org,
	imtangchen@...il.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH 6/6] mem-hotplug: Introduce movablenode boot option

Hello toshi-san

On 09/25/2013 12:00 AM, Toshi Kani wrote:
> On Tue, 2013-09-24 at 23:24 +0800, Zhang Yanfei wrote:
>> Hello tejun,
>>
>> On 09/24/2013 09:31 PM, Zhang Yanfei wrote:
>>>> This came up during earlier review but never was addressed.  Is
>>>>> "movablenode" the right name?  Shouldn't it be something which
>>>>> explicitly shows that it's to prepare for memory hotplug?  Also, maybe
>>>>> the above param should generate warning if CONFIG_MOVABLE_NODE isn't
>>>>> enabled?
>>> hmmm...as for the option name, if this option is set, it means, the kernel
>>> could support the functionality that a whole node is the so called
>>> movable node, which only has ZONE MOVABLE zone in it. So we choose
>>> to name the parameter "movablenode".
>>>
>>> As for the warning, will add it.
>>
>> I am now preparing the v5 version. Only in this patch we haven't come to an
>> agreement. So as for the boot option name, after my explanation, do you still
>> have the objection? Or you could suggest a good name for us, that'll be
>> very thankful:)
> 
> I do not think the granularity has to stay as a node, and this option
> does nothing to with other devices that may be included in a node.  So,
> how about using "movablemem"?
> 

As I explained before, we use movablenode to mean a node could only have
a MOVABLE zone from the memory aspect. So I still think movablenode seems
better than movablemem. movablemem seems vaguer here....

-- 
Thanks.
Zhang Yanfei
--
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/