Re: [PATCH v3 3/3] acpi,memory-hotplug : add memory offline code to acpi_memory_device_remove()

[Toshi Kani <toshi.kani@hp.com>]

On Mon, 2012-10-29 at 06:16 +0000, Wen Congyang wrote:
> At 10/27/2012 01:14 AM, Toshi Kani Wrote:
> > On Fri, 2012-10-26 at 18:31 +0800, wency@cn.fujitsu.com wrote:
> >> From: Yasuaki Ishimatsu <isimatu.yasuaki@jp.fujitsu.com>
> >>
> >> The memory device can be removed by 2 ways:
> >> 1. send eject request by SCI
> >> 2. echo 1 >/sys/bus/pci/devices/PNP0C80:XX/eject
> >>
> >> In the 1st case, acpi_memory_disable_device() will be called.
> >> In the 2nd case, acpi_memory_device_remove() will be called.
> > 
> > Hi Yasuaki, Wen,
> > 
> > Why do you need to have separate code design & implementation for the
> > two cases?  In other words, can the 1st case simply use the same code
> > path of the 2nd case, just like I did for the CPU hot-remove patch
> > below?  It will simplify the code and make the memory notify handler
> > more consistent with other handlers.
> > https://lkml.org/lkml/2012/10/19/456
> 
> Yes, the 1st case can simply reuse the same code of the 2nd case.
> It is another issue. The memory is not offlined and removed in 2nd
> case. This patchset tries to fix this problem. After doing this,
> we can merge the codes for the two cases.
> 
> But there is some bug in the code for 2nd case:
> If offlining memory failed, we don't know such error in 2nd case, and
> the kernel will in a dangerous state: the memory device is poweroffed
> but the kernel is using it.
> 
> We should fix this bug before merging them.

Hi Wen,

Sounds good.  Thanks for the clarification!

-Toshi



> Thanks
> Wen Congyang
> 


--
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/ .
Don't email: <a href=mailto:"dont@kvack.org"> email@kvack.org </a>