Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> On Thursday, December 13, 2012 10:36:38 AM Jiang Liu wrote:
>> On 2012-12-12 22:37, Liu, Jinsong wrote:
>>> Wen Congyang wrote:
>>>> At 12/08/2012 06:19 AM, Rafael J. Wysocki Wrote:
>>>>> On Tuesday, December 04, 2012 01:39:54 AM Liu, Jinsong wrote:
>>>>>> Resend it, add Rafael and linux-a...@vger.kernel.org
>>>>>
>>>>> I wonder what memory hotplug people think about that.
>>>>>
>>>>> Thanks,
>>>>> Rafael
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>> ===============
>>>>>> From 1d39279e45c54ce531691da5ffe261e7689dd92c Mon Sep 17
>>>>>> 00:00:00 2001 From: Liu Jinsong <jinsong....@intel.com>
>>>>>> Date: Wed, 14 Nov 2012 18:52:06 +0800
>>>>>> Subject: [PATCH] X86/acpi: remove redundant logic of acpi memory
>>>>>> hotadd
>>>>>>
>>>>>> When memory hotadd, acpi_memory_enable_device has already been
>>>>>> done at drv->ops.add (acpi_memory_device_add), no need to do it
>>>>>> again at notify callback.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> At acpi_memory_enable_device, acpi_memory_get_device_resources
>>>>>> is also a redundant action, since it has been done at
>>>>>> drv->ops.add.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Signed-off-by: Liu Jinsong <jinsong....@intel.com>
>>>>>> ---
>>>>>> drivers/acpi/acpi_memhotplug.c | 17 -----------------
>>>>>> 1 files changed, 0 insertions(+), 17 deletions(-)
>>>>>>
>>>>>> diff --git a/drivers/acpi/acpi_memhotplug.c
>>>>>> b/drivers/acpi/acpi_memhotplug.c
>>>>>> index 24c807f..a6489fd 100644
>>>>>> --- a/drivers/acpi/acpi_memhotplug.c
>>>>>> +++ b/drivers/acpi/acpi_memhotplug.c
>>>>>> @@ -220,15 +220,6 @@ static int acpi_memory_enable_device(struct
>>>>>> acpi_memory_device *mem_device) struct acpi_memory_info *info;
>>>>>> int node;
>>>>>>
>>>>>> -
>>>>>> - /* Get the range from the _CRS */
>>>>>> - result = acpi_memory_get_device_resources(mem_device);
>>>>>> - if (result) {
>>>>>> - printk(KERN_ERR PREFIX "get_device_resources failed\n");
>>>>>> - mem_device->state = MEMORY_INVALID_STATE;
>>>>>> - return result;
>>>>>> - }
>>>>>> -
>>>>>> node = acpi_get_node(mem_device->device->handle); /*
>>>>>> * Tell the VM there is more memory here...
>>>>>> @@ -357,14 +348,6 @@ static void
>>>>>> acpi_memory_device_notify(acpi_handle handle, u32
>>>>>> event, void
>>>>>> *data) break; }
>>>>>>
>>>>>> - if (acpi_memory_check_device(mem_device))
>>>>>> - break;
>>>>
>>>> Hmm, if acpi_memory_check_device() fails, it means the memory
>>>> device disappears I don't know if a real hardware uses this way to
>>>> remove memory device.
>>>>
>>>>>> -
>>>>>> - if (acpi_memory_enable_device(mem_device)) {
>>>>>> - printk(KERN_ERR PREFIX "Cannot enable memory
>>>>>> device\n");
>>>>>> - break;
>>>>>> - }
>>>>
>>>> If acpi_memory_get_device() doesn't fail, it means that the device
>>>> has been managed by this driver, so I think we can do this cleanup.
>>>>
>>>> Thanks
>>>> Wen Congyang
>>>>
>>>
>>> Thanks! any comments from Huawei side, Jiang? Hi Jinsong,
>>
>> We think it's ok.
>>
>> acpi_memory_device_notify
>> acpi_memory_get_device
>> acpi_memory_device_add
>> acpi_memory_get_device_resources
>> acpi_memory_enable_device
>> acpi_memory_get_device_resources（redundant）
>> acpi_memory_check_device（redundant）
>> acpi_memory_enable_device（redundant）
>
> OK, thanks.
>
> I'll queue it up for submission as a fix later in the cycle.
>
> Thanks,
> Rafael
Thank you all!
Jinsong
