[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <5688b358-36bc-ccf0-d24b-a65375a9f3c3@redhat.com>
Date: Fri, 7 Aug 2020 08:58:09 +0200
From: David Hildenbrand <david@...hat.com>
To: Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
Srikar Dronamraju <srikar@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
Cc: Michal Hocko <mhocko@...nel.org>,
Michal Such?nek <msuchanek@...e.de>,
Gautham R Shenoy <ego@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-mm@...ck.org,
Satheesh Rajendran <sathnaga@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
Mel Gorman <mgorman@...e.de>,
"Kirill A. Shutemov" <kirill@...temov.name>,
linuxppc-dev@...ts.ozlabs.org, Christopher Lameter <cl@...ux.com>,
Vlastimil Babka <vbabka@...e.cz>,
Andi Kleen <ak@...ux.intel.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v5 3/3] mm/page_alloc: Keep memoryless cpuless node 0
offline
On 07.08.20 06:32, Andrew Morton wrote:
> On Fri, 3 Jul 2020 18:28:23 +0530 Srikar Dronamraju <srikar@...ux.vnet.ibm.com> wrote:
>
>>> The memory hotplug changes that somehow because you can hotremove numa
>>> nodes and therefore make the nodemask sparse but that is not a common
>>> case. I am not sure what would happen if a completely new node was added
>>> and its corresponding node was already used by the renumbered one
>>> though. It would likely conflate the two I am afraid. But I am not sure
>>> this is really possible with x86 and a lack of a bug report would
>>> suggest that nobody is doing that at least.
>>>
>>
>> JFYI,
>> Satheesh copied in this mailchain had opened a bug a year on crash with vcpu
>> hotplug on memoryless node.
>>
>> https://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=202187
>
> So... do we merge this patch or not? Seems that the overall view is
> "risky but nobody is likely to do anything better any time soon"?
I recall the issue Michal saw was "fix powerpc" vs. "break other
architectures". @Michal how should we proceed? At least x86-64 won't be
affected IIUC.
--
Thanks,
David / dhildenb
Powered by blists - more mailing lists