From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Date: Thu, 1 Nov 2007 00:46:13 +0900 From: KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki Subject: Re: [RFC] hotplug memory remove - walk_memory_resource for ppc64 Message-Id: <20071101004613.37fee22f.kamezawa.hiroyu@jp.fujitsu.com> In-Reply-To: <1193846560.17412.3.camel@dyn9047017100.beaverton.ibm.com> References: <1191346196.6106.20.camel@dyn9047017100.beaverton.ibm.com> <18178.52359.953289.638736@cargo.ozlabs.ibm.com> <1193771951.8904.22.camel@dyn9047017100.beaverton.ibm.com> <20071031142846.aef9c545.kamezawa.hiroyu@jp.fujitsu.com> <20071031143423.586498c3.kamezawa.hiroyu@jp.fujitsu.com> <1193846560.17412.3.camel@dyn9047017100.beaverton.ibm.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org Return-Path: To: Badari Pulavarty Cc: paulus@samba.org, linuxppc-dev@ozlabs.org, linux-mm@kvack.org, anton@au1.ibm.com List-ID: On Wed, 31 Oct 2007 08:02:40 -0800 Badari Pulavarty wrote: > Paul's concern is, since we didn't need it so far - why we need this > for hotplug memory remove to work ? It might break API for *unknown* > applications. Its unfortunate that, hotplug memory add updates > /proc/iomem. We can deal with it later, as a separate patch. > I have no objection to skip /proc/iomem related routine when arch doesn't need it. My advice is just "please take care both of hot-add and hot-remove". If ppc64 people agreed to use arch-specific routine for detect conventional memory, there is no problem, I think. Thanks, -Kame -- To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in the body to majordomo@kvack.org. For more info on Linux MM, see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ . Don't email: email@kvack.org