[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <20160901001751.m3z2snlop2djzqgd@arbab-vm>
Date: Wed, 31 Aug 2016 19:17:51 -0500
From: Reza Arbab <arbab@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
To: David Rientjes <rientjes@...gle.com>
Cc: Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
Vlastimil Babka <vbabka@...e.cz>,
Vitaly Kuznetsov <vkuznets@...hat.com>,
Yaowei Bai <baiyaowei@...s.chinamobile.com>,
Joonsoo Kim <iamjoonsoo.kim@....com>,
Dan Williams <dan.j.williams@...el.com>,
Xishi Qiu <qiuxishi@...wei.com>,
David Vrabel <david.vrabel@...rix.com>,
Chen Yucong <slaoub@...il.com>,
Andrew Banman <abanman@....com>,
Seth Jennings <sjenning@...hat.com>, linux-mm@...ck.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [RESEND PATCH v2] memory-hotplug: fix store_mem_state() return
value
On Wed, Aug 31, 2016 at 05:03:25PM -0700, David Rientjes wrote:
>Nope, the return value of changing state from online to online was
>established almost 11 years ago in commit 3947be1969a9.
Fair enough. So if online-to-online is -EINVAL,
1. Shouldn't 'echo 1 > online' then also return -EINVAL?
2. store_mem_state() still needs a tweak, right? It was only returning
-EINVAL by accident, due to the convoluted sequence I listed in the
patch.
--
Reza Arbab
Powered by blists - more mailing lists