[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <51333360-bcf6-0d21-923c-ce8aca4c8719@redhat.com>
Date: Sat, 17 Oct 2020 11:36:39 +0200
From: David Hildenbrand <david@...hat.com>
To: Mike Rapoport <rppt@...nel.org>,
Sudarshan Rajagopalan <sudaraja@...eaurora.org>
Cc: linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@....com>,
Will Deacon <will@...nel.org>,
Anshuman Khandual <anshuman.khandual@....com>,
Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@....com>,
Steven Price <steven.price@....com>,
Logan Gunthorpe <logang@...tatee.com>,
Suren Baghdasaryan <surenb@...gle.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] mm/memory_hotplug: allow marking of memory sections
as hotpluggable
On 17.10.20 10:26, Mike Rapoport wrote:
> On Fri, Oct 16, 2020 at 07:02:23PM -0700, Sudarshan Rajagopalan wrote:
>> Certain architectures such as arm64 doesn't allow boot memory to be
>> offlined and removed. Distinguish certain memory sections as
>> "hotpluggable" which can be marked by module drivers stating to memory
>> hotplug layer that these sections can be offlined and then removed.
>
> I don't quite follow why marking sections as hotpluggable or not should
> be done by a device driver. Can you describe in more details your
> use-case and why there is a need to add a flag to the memory map?
>
This seems to be related to
https://lkml.kernel.org/r/de8388df2fbc5a6a33aab95831ba7db4@codeaurora.org
After reading how the driver is trying to abuse memory hot(un)plug
infrastructure, my tentative
Nacked-by: David Hildenbrand <david@...hat.com>
--
Thanks,
David / dhildenb
Powered by blists - more mailing lists