[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <1786a855-de7e-f9f9-d9b1-9dbe081e7360@deltatee.com>
Date: Wed, 8 Jan 2020 12:29:00 -0700
From: Logan Gunthorpe <logang@...tatee.com>
To: Dan Williams <dan.j.williams@...el.com>,
David Hildenbrand <david@...hat.com>
Cc: Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Linux ARM <linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>,
linux-ia64@...r.kernel.org,
linuxppc-dev <linuxppc-dev@...ts.ozlabs.org>,
linux-s390 <linux-s390@...r.kernel.org>,
Linux-sh <linux-sh@...r.kernel.org>,
platform-driver-x86@...r.kernel.org, Linux MM <linux-mm@...ck.org>,
Michal Hocko <mhocko@...nel.org>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
Christoph Hellwig <hch@....de>,
Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@....com>,
Will Deacon <will@...nel.org>,
Benjamin Herrenschmidt <benh@...nel.crashing.org>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>, Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>,
Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@...ux.intel.com>,
Andy Lutomirski <luto@...nel.org>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
Eric Badger <ebadger@...aio.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 2/8] mm/memory_hotplug: Rename mhp_restrictions to
mhp_modifiers
On 2020-01-08 12:13 p.m., Dan Williams wrote:
> On Wed, Jan 8, 2020 at 11:08 AM David Hildenbrand <david@...hat.com> wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>>> Am 08.01.2020 um 20:00 schrieb Dan Williams <dan.j.williams@...el.com>:
>>>
>>> On Wed, Jan 8, 2020 at 9:17 AM Logan Gunthorpe <logang@...tatee.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>> On 2020-01-08 5:28 a.m., David Hildenbrand wrote:
>>>>> On 07.01.20 21:59, Logan Gunthorpe wrote:
>>>>>> The mhp_restrictions struct really doesn't specify anything resembling
>>>>>> a restriction anymore so rename it to be mhp_modifiers.
>>>>>
>>>>> I wonder if something like "mhp_params" would be even better. It's
>>>>> essentially just a way to avoid changing call chains rough-out all archs
>>>>> whenever we want to add a new parameter.
>>>>
>>>> Sure, that does sound a bit nicer to me. I can change it for v3.
>>>
>>> Oh, I was just about to chime in to support "modifiers" because I
>>> would expect all parameters to folded into a "params" struct. The
>>> modifiers seem to be limited to the set of items that are only
>>> considered in a non-default / expert memory hotplug use cases.
>>
>> It‘s a set of extended parameters I‘d say.
> Sure, we can call them "mhp_params" and just clarify that they are
> optional / extended in the kernel-doc.
Well pgprot isn't going to be optional... But I'll add something to the
kernel_doc.
Logan
Powered by blists - more mailing lists