[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20190701124628.GT6376@dhcp22.suse.cz>
Date: Mon, 1 Jul 2019 14:46:28 +0200
From: Michal Hocko <mhocko@...nel.org>
To: David Hildenbrand <david@...hat.com>
Cc: linux-mm@...ck.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
linux-ia64@...r.kernel.org, linuxppc-dev@...ts.ozlabs.org,
linux-s390@...r.kernel.org, linux-sh@...r.kernel.org,
linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org, akpm@...ux-foundation.org,
Dan Williams <dan.j.williams@...el.com>,
Wei Yang <richard.weiyang@...il.com>,
Igor Mammedov <imammedo@...hat.com>,
Martin Schwidefsky <schwidefsky@...ibm.com>,
Heiko Carstens <heiko.carstens@...ibm.com>,
Mike Rapoport <rppt@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
Vasily Gorbik <gor@...ux.ibm.com>,
Oscar Salvador <osalvador@...e.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 02/11] s390x/mm: Fail when an altmap is used for
arch_add_memory()
On Mon 01-07-19 09:43:06, Michal Hocko wrote:
> On Mon 27-05-19 13:11:43, David Hildenbrand wrote:
> > ZONE_DEVICE is not yet supported, fail if an altmap is passed, so we
> > don't forget arch_add_memory()/arch_remove_memory() when unlocking
> > support.
>
> Why do we need this? Sure ZONE_DEVICE is not supported for s390 and so
> might be the case for other arches which support hotplug. I do not see
> much point in adding warning to each of them.
I would drop this one. If there is a strong reason to have something
like that it should come with a better explanation and it can be done on
top.
--
Michal Hocko
SUSE Labs
Powered by blists - more mailing lists