[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20190717073853.GA22253@linux>
Date: Wed, 17 Jul 2019 09:38:58 +0200
From: Oscar Salvador <osalvador@...e.de>
To: Dan Williams <dan.j.williams@...el.com>
Cc: "Aneesh Kumar K.V" <aneesh.kumar@...ux.ibm.com>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
David Hildenbrand <david@...hat.com>,
Pavel Tatashin <pasha.tatashin@...een.com>,
Michal Hocko <mhocko@...e.com>, Linux MM <linux-mm@...ck.org>,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] mm,memory_hotplug: Fix shrink_{zone,node}_span
On Tue, Jul 16, 2019 at 07:28:54PM -0700, Dan Williams wrote:
> This makes it more clear that the problem is with the "start_pfn ==
> pfn" check relative to subsections, but it does not clarify why it
> needs to clear pfn_valid() before calling shrink_zone_span().
> Sections were not invalidated prior to shrink_zone_span() in the
> pre-subsection implementation and it seems all we need is to keep the
> same semantic. I.e. skip the range that is currently being removed:
Yes, as I said in my reply to Aneesh, that is the other way I thought
when fixing it.
The reason I went this way is because it seemed more reasonable and
natural to me that pfn_valid() would just return the next active
sub-section.
I just though that we could leverage the fact that we can deactivate
a sub-section before scanning for the next one.
On a second thought, the changes do not outweight the case, being the first
fix enough and less intrusive, so I will send a v2 with that instead.
--
Oscar Salvador
SUSE L3
Powered by blists - more mailing lists