[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20200812060101.GB10992@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
Date: Wed, 12 Aug 2020 11:31:01 +0530
From: Srikar Dronamraju <srikar@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
To: Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
Cc: Michal Hocko <mhocko@...nel.org>,
Michal Such?nek <msuchanek@...e.de>,
David Hildenbrand <david@...hat.com>,
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
Hi Andrew, Michal, David
* Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org> [2020-08-06 21:32:11]:
> 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"?
Can we decide on this one way or the other?
--
Thanks and Regards
Srikar Dronamraju
Powered by blists - more mailing lists