[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <87zie08ekt.fsf@concordia.ellerman.id.au>
Date: Fri, 26 May 2017 13:46:58 +1000
From: Michael Ellerman <mpe@...erman.id.au>
To: Reza Arbab <arbab@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
Balbir Singh <bsingharora@...il.com>
Cc: Michael Bringmann <mwb@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Paul Mackerras <paulus@...ba.org>,
"Aneesh Kumar K.V" <aneesh.kumar@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
Bharata B Rao <bharata@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
Shailendra Singh <shailendras@...dia.com>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
linuxppc-dev@...ts.ozlabs.org,
Sebastian Andrzej Siewior <bigeasy@...utronix.de>
Subject: Re: [Patch 2/2]: powerpc/hotplug/mm: Fix hot-add memory node assoc
Reza Arbab <arbab@...ux.vnet.ibm.com> writes:
> On Thu, May 25, 2017 at 04:19:53PM +1000, Michael Ellerman wrote:
>>The commit message for 3af229f2071f says:
>>
>> In practice, we never see a system with 256 NUMA nodes, and in fact, we
>> do not support node hotplug on power in the first place, so the nodes
>> ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>> that are online when we come up are the nodes that will be present for
>> the lifetime of this kernel.
>>
>>Is that no longer true?
>
> I don't know what the reasoning behind that statement was at the time,
> but as far as I can tell, the only thing missing for node hotplug now is
> Balbir's patchset [1]. He fixes the resource issue which motivated
> 3af229f2071f and reverts it.
>
> With that set, I can instantiate a new numa node just by doing
> add_memory(nid, ...) where nid doesn't currently exist.
But does that actually happen on any real system?
cheers
Powered by blists - more mailing lists