From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Date: Thu, 1 Nov 2007 09:46:29 +0900 From: KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/3] Add remove_memory() for ppc64 Message-Id: <20071101094629.fac6077c.kamezawa.hiroyu@jp.fujitsu.com> In-Reply-To: <1193867703.6271.42.camel@localhost> References: <1193849375.17412.34.camel@dyn9047017100.beaverton.ibm.com> <1193863502.6271.38.camel@localhost> <1193868715.17412.55.camel@dyn9047017100.beaverton.ibm.com> <1193867703.6271.42.camel@localhost> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org Return-Path: To: Dave Hansen Cc: Badari Pulavarty , Paul Mackerras , Andrew Morton , linuxppc-dev@ozlabs.org, anton@au1.ibm.com, linux-mm , GOTO List-ID: On Wed, 31 Oct 2007 14:55:03 -0700 Dave Hansen wrote: > On Wed, 2007-10-31 at 14:11 -0800, Badari Pulavarty wrote: > > > > Well, We don't need arch-specific remove_memory() for ia64 and ppc64. > > x86_64, I don't know. We will know, only when some one does the > > verification. I don't need arch_remove_memory() hook also at this > > time. > > I wasn't being very clear. I say, add the arch hook only if you need > it. But, for now, just take the ia64 code and make it generic. > remove_memory() has been arch-specific since there was no piece of unplug code. And I didn't merge it to be generic when I implemented ia64 ver. Hmm...I have no objection to merge them. But let's see how memory hotremove for ppc64 works for a while. We can merge them later. I'm glad to have new testers :) 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