linux-mm.kvack.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: David Hildenbrand <david@redhat.com>
To: Michal Hocko <mhocko@kernel.org>
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>,
	Stephen Rothwell <sfr@canb.auug.org.au>,
	Pavel Tatashin <pasha.tatashin@soleen.com>,
	Oscar Salvador <osalvador@suse.de>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v1] drivers/base/node.c: Simplify unregister_memory_block_under_nodes()
Date: Fri, 19 Jul 2019 11:05:51 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <eff19965-f280-6124-8fc5-56e3101f67cb@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20190719084239.GO30461@dhcp22.suse.cz>

On 19.07.19 10:42, Michal Hocko wrote:
> On Thu 18-07-19 16:22:39, David Hildenbrand wrote:
>> We don't allow to offline memory block devices that belong to multiple
>> numa nodes. Therefore, such devices can never get removed. It is
>> sufficient to process a single node when removing the memory block.
>>
>> Remember for each memory block if it belongs to no, a single, or mixed
>> nodes, so we can use that information to skip unregistering or print a
>> warning (essentially a safety net to catch BUGs).
> 
> I do not really like NUMA_NO_NODE - 1 thing. This is yet another invalid
> node that is magic. Why should we even care? In other words why is this
> patch an improvement?

Oh, and to answer that part of the question:

We no longer have to iterate over each pfn of a memory block to be removed.

-- 

Thanks,

David / dhildenb


  parent reply	other threads:[~2019-07-19  9:05 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 11+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2019-07-18 14:22 David Hildenbrand
2019-07-19  8:14 ` David Hildenbrand
2019-07-19  8:42 ` Michal Hocko
2019-07-19  8:48   ` David Hildenbrand
2019-07-19  9:09     ` Michal Hocko
2019-07-19  9:18       ` David Hildenbrand
2019-07-19  9:05   ` David Hildenbrand [this message]
2019-07-19  9:13     ` Michal Hocko
2019-07-19  9:20       ` David Hildenbrand
2019-07-19 11:36         ` Michal Hocko
2019-07-19 11:42           ` 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=eff19965-f280-6124-8fc5-56e3101f67cb@redhat.com \
    --to=david@redhat.com \
    --cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
    --cc=gregkh@linuxfoundation.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
    --cc=mhocko@kernel.org \
    --cc=osalvador@suse.de \
    --cc=pasha.tatashin@soleen.com \
    --cc=rafael@kernel.org \
    --cc=sfr@canb.auug.org.au \
    /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