From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail144.messagelabs.com (mail144.messagelabs.com [216.82.254.51]) by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 32DD36B0087 for ; Thu, 18 Nov 2010 16:31:54 -0500 (EST) Received: from hpaq5.eem.corp.google.com (hpaq5.eem.corp.google.com [172.25.149.5]) by smtp-out.google.com with ESMTP id oAILVofX008702 for ; Thu, 18 Nov 2010 13:31:50 -0800 Received: from gyh20 (gyh20.prod.google.com [10.243.50.212]) by hpaq5.eem.corp.google.com with ESMTP id oAILVB9a030591 for ; Thu, 18 Nov 2010 13:31:49 -0800 Received: by gyh20 with SMTP id 20so2397718gyh.3 for ; Thu, 18 Nov 2010 13:31:49 -0800 (PST) Date: Thu, 18 Nov 2010 13:31:45 -0800 (PST) From: David Rientjes Subject: Re: [7/8,v3] NUMA Hotplug Emulator: extend memory probe interface to support NUMA In-Reply-To: <20101118044850.GC2408@shaohui> Message-ID: References: <20101117020759.016741414@intel.com> <20101117021000.916235444@intel.com> <1290019807.9173.3789.camel@nimitz> <20101118044850.GC2408@shaohui> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org To: Shaohui Zheng Cc: Dave Hansen , akpm@linux-foundation.org, linux-mm@kvack.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, haicheng.li@linux.intel.com, lethal@linux-sh.org, ak@linux.intel.com, shaohui.zheng@linux.intel.com, Haicheng Li , Wu Fengguang , Greg KH List-ID: On Thu, 18 Nov 2010, Shaohui Zheng wrote: > > Then, export the amount of memory that is actually physically present in > > the e820 but was truncated by mem= and allow users to hot-add the memory > > via the probe interface. Add a writeable 'node' file to offlined memory > > section directories and allow it to be changed prior to online. > > for memory offlining, it is a known diffcult thing, and it is not supported > well in current kernel, so I do not suggest to provide the offline interface > in the emulator, it just take more pains. We can consider to add it when > the memory offlining works well. > You're referring to the inability to remove memory sections for CONFIG_SPARSEMEM_VMEMMAP? You should still able to test the offlining with other memory models of emulated nodes by using the generic support already implemented for CONFIG_MEMORY_HOTREMOVE; the short answer is that it probably shouldn't matter at all since we already support node hot-remove and the fact that they are emulated nodes isn't really of interest. -- 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/ . Fight unfair telecom policy in Canada: sign http://dissolvethecrtc.ca/ Don't email: email@kvack.org