From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Date: Mon, 8 Sep 2008 11:36:19 +0200 From: Andi Kleen Subject: Re: [PATCH] [RESEND] x86_64: add memory hotremove config option Message-ID: <20080908093619.GC26079@one.firstfloor.org> References: <20080905215452.GF11692@us.ibm.com> <20080906153855.7260.E1E9C6FF@jp.fujitsu.com> <20080906085320.GE18288@one.firstfloor.org> <200809081552.50126.nickpiggin@yahoo.com.au> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <200809081552.50126.nickpiggin@yahoo.com.au> Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org Return-Path: To: Nick Piggin Cc: Andi Kleen , Yasunori Goto , Gary Hade , linux-mm@kvack.org, Andrew Morton , Badari Pulavarty , Mel Gorman , Chris McDermott , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, x86@kernel.org, Ingo Molnar List-ID: > You use non-linear mappings for the kernel, so that kernel data is > not tied to a specific physical address. AFAIK, that is the only way > to really do it completely (like the fragmentation problem). Even with that there are lots of issues, like keeping track of DMAs or handling executing kernel code. > > Of course, I don't think that would be a good idea to do that in the > forseeable future. Agreed. -Andi -- ak@linux.intel.com -- 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