[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <f0f68a16-9bf2-703a-345f-5061e821e80a@intel.com>
Date: Thu, 28 Sep 2023 10:37:56 -0700
From: Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@...el.com>
To: David Hildenbrand <david@...hat.com>,
Stanislav Kinsburskii <skinsburskii@...ux.microsoft.com>,
Baoquan He <bhe@...hat.com>
Cc: tglx@...utronix.de, mingo@...hat.com, bp@...en8.de,
dave.hansen@...ux.intel.com, x86@...nel.org, hpa@...or.com,
ebiederm@...ssion.com, akpm@...ux-foundation.org,
stanislav.kinsburskii@...il.com, corbet@....net,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, kexec@...ts.infradead.org,
linux-mm@...ck.org, kys@...rosoft.com, jgowans@...zon.com,
wei.liu@...nel.org, arnd@...db.de, gregkh@...uxfoundation.org,
graf@...zon.de, pbonzini@...hat.com
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH v2 0/7] Introduce persistent memory pool
On 9/28/23 10:35, David Hildenbrand wrote:
> On 28.09.23 15:22, Dave Hansen wrote:
>> On 9/27/23 09:13, Stanislav Kinsburskii wrote:
>>> Once deposited, these pages can't be accessed by Linux anymore and thus
>>> must be preserved in "used" state across kexec, as hypervisor state is
>>> unware of kexec.
>>
>> If Linux can't access them, they're not RAM any more. I'd much rather
>> remove them from the memory map and move on with life rather than
>> implement a bunch of new ABI that's got to be handed across kernels.
>
> The motivation of handling kexec (faster?) in a hyper-v domain doesn't
> sound particularly compelling got me for such features. If you inflated
> memory, just don't allow to kexec. It's been broken for years IIUC.
That's a good point. What prevents deflating before kexec?
Powered by blists - more mailing lists