[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <54F67376.8050001@huawei.com>
Date: Wed, 4 Mar 2015 10:52:38 +0800
From: Xishi Qiu <qiuxishi@...wei.com>
To: Gu Zheng <guz.fnst@...fujitsu.com>
CC: Yasuaki Ishimatsu <isimatu.yasuaki@...fujitsu.com>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
Tang Chen <tangchen@...fujitsu.com>,
Yinghai Lu <yinghai@...nel.org>, Linux MM <linux-mm@...ck.org>,
LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Toshi Kani <toshi.kani@...com>, Mel Gorman <mgorman@...e.de>,
Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>, Xiexiuqi <xiexiuqi@...wei.com>,
Hanjun Guo <guohanjun@...wei.com>,
Li Zefan <lizefan@...wei.com>
Subject: Re: node-hotplug: is memset 0 safe in try_offline_node()?
On 2015/3/4 10:22, Xishi Qiu wrote:
> On 2015/3/3 18:20, Gu Zheng wrote:
>
>> Hi Xishi,
>> On 03/03/2015 11:30 AM, Xishi Qiu wrote:
>>
>>> When hot-remove a numa node, we will clear pgdat,
>>> but is memset 0 safe in try_offline_node()?
>>
>> It is not safe here. In fact, this is a temporary solution here.
>> As you know, pgdat is accessed lock-less now, so protection
>> mechanism (RCU?) is needed to make it completely safe here,
>> but it seems a bit over-kill.
>>
Hi Gu,
Can we just remove "memset(pgdat, 0, sizeof(*pgdat));" ?
I find this will be fine in the stress test except the warning
when hot-add memory.
Thanks,
Xishi Qiu
--
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