linux-mm.kvack.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Michal Hocko <mhocko@kernel.org>
To: David Hildenbrand <david@redhat.com>
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-mm@kvack.org,
	Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>,
	"Rafael J. Wysocki" <rafael@kernel.org>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
	Pavel Tatashin <pasha.tatashin@soleen.com>,
	Dan Williams <dan.j.williams@intel.com>,
	Oscar Salvador <osalvador@suse.de>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v1] drivers/base/memory.c: Don't store end_section_nr in memory blocks
Date: Wed, 31 Jul 2019 14:43:56 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20190731124356.GL9330@dhcp22.suse.cz> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20190731122213.13392-1-david@redhat.com>

On Wed 31-07-19 14:22:13, David Hildenbrand wrote:
> Each memory block spans the same amount of sections/pages/bytes. The size
> is determined before the first memory block is created. No need to store
> what we can easily calculate - and the calculations even look simpler now.

While this cleanup helps a bit, I am not sure this is really worth
bothering. I guess we can agree when I say that the memblock interface
is suboptimal (to put it mildly).  Shouldn't we strive for making it
a real hotplug API in the future? What do I mean by that? Why should
be any memblock fixed in size? Shouldn't we have use hotplugable units
instead (aka pfn range that userspace can work with sensibly)? Do we
know of any existing userspace that would depend on the current single
section res. 2GB sized memblocks?

All that being said, I do not oppose to the patch but can we start
thinking about the underlying memblock limitations rather than micro
cleanups?
-- 
Michal Hocko
SUSE Labs


  reply	other threads:[~2019-07-31 12:44 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 18+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2019-07-31 12:22 David Hildenbrand
2019-07-31 12:43 ` Michal Hocko [this message]
2019-07-31 13:12   ` David Hildenbrand
2019-07-31 13:25     ` Michal Hocko
2019-07-31 13:42       ` David Hildenbrand
2019-07-31 14:04         ` David Hildenbrand
2019-07-31 14:15           ` Michal Hocko
2019-07-31 14:23             ` David Hildenbrand
2019-07-31 14:14         ` Michal Hocko
2019-07-31 14:21           ` David Hildenbrand
2019-07-31 14:37             ` Michal Hocko
2019-07-31 14:43               ` David Hildenbrand
2019-08-01  6:13                 ` Michal Hocko
2019-08-01  7:00                   ` David Hildenbrand
2019-08-01  8:27                     ` Michal Hocko
2019-08-01  8:36                       ` David Hildenbrand
2019-07-31 20:57 ` Andrew Morton
2019-08-01  6:48   ` David Hildenbrand

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=20190731124356.GL9330@dhcp22.suse.cz \
    --to=mhocko@kernel.org \
    --cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
    --cc=dan.j.williams@intel.com \
    --cc=david@redhat.com \
    --cc=gregkh@linuxfoundation.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
    --cc=osalvador@suse.de \
    --cc=pasha.tatashin@soleen.com \
    --cc=rafael@kernel.org \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox