linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v4 1/2] memory-hotplug: add automatic onlining policy for the newly added memory

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: <alpine.DEB.2.10.1601141345430.16227@chino.kir.corp.google.com>
Date:	Thu, 14 Jan 2016 13:46:22 -0800 (PST)
From:	David Rientjes <rientjes@...gle.com>
To:	Vitaly Kuznetsov <vkuznets@...hat.com>
cc:	linux-mm@...ck.org, Jonathan Corbet <corbet@....net>,
	Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
	Daniel Kiper <daniel.kiper@...cle.com>,
	Dan Williams <dan.j.williams@...el.com>,
	Tang Chen <tangchen@...fujitsu.com>,
	David Vrabel <david.vrabel@...rix.com>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
	Naoya Horiguchi <n-horiguchi@...jp.nec.com>,
	Xishi Qiu <qiuxishi@...wei.com>,
	Mel Gorman <mgorman@...hsingularity.net>,
	"K. Y. Srinivasan" <kys@...rosoft.com>,
	Igor Mammedov <imammedo@...hat.com>,
	Kay Sievers <kay@...y.org>,
	Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk <konrad.wilk@...cle.com>,
	Boris Ostrovsky <boris.ostrovsky@...cle.com>,
	linux-doc@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	xen-devel@...ts.xenproject.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 1/2] memory-hotplug: add automatic onlining policy
 for the newly added memory

On Thu, 14 Jan 2016, Vitaly Kuznetsov wrote:

> > My suggestion is to just simply document that auto-onlining can add the 
> > memory but fail to online it and the failure is silent to userspace.  If 
> > userspace cares, it can check the online status of the added memory blocks 
> > itself.
> 
> The problem is not only that it's silent, but also that
> /sys/devices/system/memory/*/state will lie as we create all memory
> blocks in MEM_ONLINE state and from online_pages() error we can't figure
> out which particular block failed. 'v5' which I sent yesterday is
> supposed to fix the issue (blocks are onlined with
> memory_block_change_state() which handles failures.
> 

Would you mind documenting that in the memory-hotplug.txt as an add-on 
patch to your v5, which appears ready to go?