From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail-wr1-f69.google.com (mail-wr1-f69.google.com [209.85.221.69]) by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 930496B0005 for ; Mon, 13 Aug 2018 04:55:37 -0400 (EDT) Received: by mail-wr1-f69.google.com with SMTP id d10-v6so12391046wrw.6 for ; Mon, 13 Aug 2018 01:55:37 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-sor-f41.google.com (mail-sor-f41.google.com. [209.85.220.41]) by mx.google.com with SMTPS id m193-v6sor1732164wma.79.2018.08.13.01.55.35 for (Google Transport Security); Mon, 13 Aug 2018 01:55:36 -0700 (PDT) Date: Mon, 13 Aug 2018 10:55:34 +0200 From: Oscar Salvador Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/3] mm/memory_hotplug: Cleanup unregister_mem_sect_under_nodes Message-ID: <20180813085534.GA1783@techadventures.net> References: <20180810152931.23004-1-osalvador@techadventures.net> <20180810152931.23004-4-osalvador@techadventures.net> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20180810152931.23004-4-osalvador@techadventures.net> Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org List-ID: To: akpm@linux-foundation.org Cc: mhocko@suse.com, vbabka@suse.cz, dan.j.williams@intel.com, yasu.isimatu@gmail.com, jonathan.cameron@huawei.com, david@redhat.com, linux-mm@kvack.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Oscar Salvador On Fri, Aug 10, 2018 at 05:29:31PM +0200, osalvador@techadventures.net wrote: > From: Oscar Salvador > > With the assumption that the relationship between > memory_block <-> node is 1:1, we can refactor this function a bit. > > This assumption is being taken from register_mem_sect_under_node() > code. Doh, this assumption is wrong for boot case when a mem_blk can have multiple sections. Nevertheless, I think that unregister_mem_sect_under_nodes can be polished a bit. I am working on that -- Oscar Salvador SUSE L3