[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <1380040432.14046.16.camel@misato.fc.hp.com>
Date: Tue, 24 Sep 2013 10:33:52 -0600
From: Toshi Kani <toshi.kani@...com>
To: Zhang Yanfei <zhangyanfei.yes@...il.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
On Wed, 2013-09-25 at 00:08 +0800, Zhang Yanfei wrote:
> 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....
But a node may contain other devices, such CPUs and PCI bridges. To me,
movablenode does not clarify that this option is from the memory
aspect...
Thanks,
-Toshi
--
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