[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <eff19965-f280-6124-8fc5-56e3101f67cb@redhat.com>
Date: Fri, 19 Jul 2019 11:05:51 +0200
From: David Hildenbrand <david@...hat.com>
To: Michal Hocko <mhocko@...nel.org>
Cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-mm@...ck.org,
Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
"Rafael J. Wysocki" <rafael@...nel.org>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
Stephen Rothwell <sfr@...b.auug.org.au>,
Pavel Tatashin <pasha.tatashin@...een.com>,
Oscar Salvador <osalvador@...e.de>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v1] drivers/base/node.c: Simplify
unregister_memory_block_under_nodes()
On 19.07.19 10:42, Michal Hocko wrote:
> On Thu 18-07-19 16:22:39, David Hildenbrand wrote:
>> We don't allow to offline memory block devices that belong to multiple
>> numa nodes. Therefore, such devices can never get removed. It is
>> sufficient to process a single node when removing the memory block.
>>
>> Remember for each memory block if it belongs to no, a single, or mixed
>> nodes, so we can use that information to skip unregistering or print a
>> warning (essentially a safety net to catch BUGs).
>
> I do not really like NUMA_NO_NODE - 1 thing. This is yet another invalid
> node that is magic. Why should we even care? In other words why is this
> patch an improvement?
Oh, and to answer that part of the question:
We no longer have to iterate over each pfn of a memory block to be removed.
--
Thanks,
David / dhildenb
Powered by blists - more mailing lists