Re: srat: harsh hot-pluggable memory check?

2013-01-11 Thread Andi Kleen
On Fri, Jan 11, 2013 at 12:13:50PM -0800, Davidlohr Bueso wrote: > On Thu, 2013-01-10 at 21:02 +0100, Andi Kleen wrote: > > > This only mentions that the system supports hot-plugging, and IMHO if the > > > user decides not to use CONFIG_MEMORY_HOTPLUG, it shouldn't be considered > > > an error. >

Re: srat: harsh hot-pluggable memory check?

2013-01-11 Thread Davidlohr Bueso
On Thu, 2013-01-10 at 21:02 +0100, Andi Kleen wrote: > > This only mentions that the system supports hot-plugging, and IMHO if the > > user decides not to use CONFIG_MEMORY_HOTPLUG, it shouldn't be considered > > an error. > > Therefore would it be ok to drop the check? Or am I missing something?

Re: srat: harsh hot-pluggable memory check?

2013-01-11 Thread Davidlohr Bueso
On Thu, 2013-01-10 at 21:02 +0100, Andi Kleen wrote: This only mentions that the system supports hot-plugging, and IMHO if the user decides not to use CONFIG_MEMORY_HOTPLUG, it shouldn't be considered an error. Therefore would it be ok to drop the check? Or am I missing something? The

Re: srat: harsh hot-pluggable memory check?

2013-01-11 Thread Andi Kleen
On Fri, Jan 11, 2013 at 12:13:50PM -0800, Davidlohr Bueso wrote: On Thu, 2013-01-10 at 21:02 +0100, Andi Kleen wrote: This only mentions that the system supports hot-plugging, and IMHO if the user decides not to use CONFIG_MEMORY_HOTPLUG, it shouldn't be considered an error.

Re: srat: harsh hot-pluggable memory check?

2013-01-10 Thread Andi Kleen
> This only mentions that the system supports hot-plugging, and IMHO if the > user decides not to use CONFIG_MEMORY_HOTPLUG, it shouldn't be considered an > error. > Therefore would it be ok to drop the check? Or am I missing something? The very strict checks were originally implemented because

srat: harsh hot-pluggable memory check?

2013-01-10 Thread Davidlohr Bueso
When parsing the memory affinity mappings in arch/x86/mm/srat.c: acpi_numa_memory_affinity_init() I'm wondering if the hot-pluggable check is too harsh, as we consider an error if the hot-pluggable bit is set and CONFIG_MEMORY_HOTPLUG is not. Based on the ACPI specs (v5): "If the Enabled bit

srat: harsh hot-pluggable memory check?

2013-01-10 Thread Davidlohr Bueso
When parsing the memory affinity mappings in arch/x86/mm/srat.c: acpi_numa_memory_affinity_init() I'm wondering if the hot-pluggable check is too harsh, as we consider an error if the hot-pluggable bit is set and CONFIG_MEMORY_HOTPLUG is not. Based on the ACPI specs (v5): If the Enabled bit

Re: srat: harsh hot-pluggable memory check?

2013-01-10 Thread Andi Kleen
This only mentions that the system supports hot-plugging, and IMHO if the user decides not to use CONFIG_MEMORY_HOTPLUG, it shouldn't be considered an error. Therefore would it be ok to drop the check? Or am I missing something? The very strict checks were originally implemented because