On Fri, Mar 17, 2017 at 6:20 AM, Michal Hocko wrote:
> On Wed 15-03-17 10:13:47, Michal Hocko wrote:
> [...]
>> It seems that all this is just started by the semantic introduced by
>> 9d99aaa31f59 ("[PATCH] x86_64: Support memory hotadd without sparsemem")
>> quite some time ago. When the movable
On Wed 15-03-17 10:13:47, Michal Hocko wrote:
[...]
> It seems that all this is just started by the semantic introduced by
> 9d99aaa31f59 ("[PATCH] x86_64: Support memory hotadd without sparsemem")
> quite some time ago. When the movable onlinining has been introduced it
> just built on top of this
On Thu 16-03-17 17:19:34, Kani, Toshimitsu wrote:
> On Thu, 2017-03-16 at 09:54 +0100, Michal Hocko wrote:
> > On Wed 15-03-17 23:08:14, Kani, Toshimitsu wrote:
> > > On Wed, 2017-03-15 at 10:13 +0100, Michal Hocko wrote:
> :
> > > > - zone = page_zone(pfn_to_page(valid_start));
> > >
> > >
On Thu, 2017-03-16 at 09:54 +0100, Michal Hocko wrote:
> On Wed 15-03-17 23:08:14, Kani, Toshimitsu wrote:
> > On Wed, 2017-03-15 at 10:13 +0100, Michal Hocko wrote:
:
> > > - zone = page_zone(pfn_to_page(valid_start));
> >
> > Please do not remove the fix made in a96dfddbcc043. zone needs to
> >
On Wed 15-03-17 23:08:14, Kani, Toshimitsu wrote:
> On Wed, 2017-03-15 at 10:13 +0100, Michal Hocko wrote:
> :
> > @@ -388,39 +389,44 @@ static ssize_t show_valid_zones(struct device
> > *dev,
> > struct device_attribute *attr, char
> > *buf)
> > {
> > struct memor
On Wed, 2017-03-15 at 10:13 +0100, Michal Hocko wrote:
:
> @@ -388,39 +389,44 @@ static ssize_t show_valid_zones(struct device
> *dev,
> struct device_attribute *attr, char
> *buf)
> {
> struct memory_block *mem = to_memory_block(dev);
> - unsigned long sta
On Wed 15-03-17 11:48:37, Vitaly Kuznetsov wrote:
> Michal Hocko writes:
[...]
> Speaking about long term approach,
Not really related to the patch but ok (I hope this will not distract
from the original intention here)...
> (I'm not really familiar with the history of memory zones code so plea
Michal Hocko writes:
> Hi,
> this is a follow up for [1]. In short the current semantic of the memory
> hotplug is awkward and hard/impossible to use from the udev to online
> memory as movable. The main problem is that only the last memblock or
> the adjacent to highest movable memblock can be o
Hi,
this is a follow up for [1]. In short the current semantic of the memory
hotplug is awkward and hard/impossible to use from the udev to online
memory as movable. The main problem is that only the last memblock or
the adjacent to highest movable memblock can be onlined as movable:
: Let's simula
9 matches
Mail list logo
