All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Nathan Fontenot <nfont@austin.ibm.com>
To: KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki <kamezawa.hiroyu@jp.fujitsu.com>
Cc: linuxppc-dev@ozlabs.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
	Dave Hansen <dave@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 4/7] Allow sysfs memory directories to be split
Date: Tue, 13 Jul 2010 22:18:03 -0500	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <4C3D2C6B.3050203@austin.ibm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20100714093550.40036034.kamezawa.hiroyu@jp.fujitsu.com>

On 07/13/2010 07:35 PM, KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki wrote:
> On Tue, 13 Jul 2010 10:51:58 -0500
> Nathan Fontenot <nfont@austin.ibm.com> wrote:
> 
>>>
>>> And for what purpose this interface is ? Does this split memory block into 2 pieces
>>> of the same size ?? sounds __very__ strange interface to me.
>>
>> Yes, this splits the memory_block into two blocks of the same size.  This was
>> suggested as something we may want to do.  From ppc perspective I am not sure we
>> would use this.
>>
>> The split functionality is not required.  The main goal of the patch set is to
>> reduce the number of memory sysfs directories created.  From a ppc perspective
>> the split functionality is not really needed.
>>
> 
> Okay, this is an offer from me.
> 
>   1. I think you can add an boot option as "don't create memory sysfs".
>      please do.

I posted a patch to do that a week or so ago, it didn't go over very well.

> 
>   2. I'd like to write a configfs module for handling memory hotplug even when
>      sysfs directroy is not created.
>      Because configfs support rmdir/mkdir, the user (ppc's daemon?) has to do
>      
>      When offlining section X.
>      # insmod configfs_memory.ko
>      # mount -t configfs none /configfs
>      # mkdir /configfs/memoryX
>      # echo offline > /configfs/memoryX/state
>      # rmdir /configfs/memoryX
> 
>   And making this operation as the default bahavior for all arch's memory hotplug may
>   be better...
> 
> Dave, how do you think ? Because ppc guys uses "probe" interface already,
> this can be handled... no ?

ppc would still require the existance of the 'probe' interface.

Are you objecting to the 'split' functionality?  If so I do not see any reason from ppc
perspective that it is needed.  This was something Dave suggested, unless I am missing
something.

Since ppc needs the 'probe' interface in sysfs, and for ppc having mutliple 
memory_block_sections reside under a single memory_block makes memory hotplug
simpler.  On ppc we do emory hotplug operations on an LMB size basis.  With my
patches this now lets us set each memory_block to span an LMB's worth of
memory.  Now we could do emory hotplug in a single operation instead of multiple
operations to offline/online all of the memory sections in an LMB.

Of course the easy solution would be to increase SECTION_SIZE_BITS, but we need
support hardware that can have LMB's from 16 MB to 256 MB in size so the
SECTION_SIZE_BITS value has to remain small. 

> 
> One problem is that I don't have enough knowledge about configfs..it seems complex.

Me neither, thoug I will take a look at it.

-Nathan

WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Nathan Fontenot <nfont@austin.ibm.com>
To: KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki <kamezawa.hiroyu@jp.fujitsu.com>
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linuxppc-dev@ozlabs.org,
	Dave Hansen <dave@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 4/7] Allow sysfs memory directories to be split
Date: Tue, 13 Jul 2010 22:18:03 -0500	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <4C3D2C6B.3050203@austin.ibm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20100714093550.40036034.kamezawa.hiroyu@jp.fujitsu.com>

On 07/13/2010 07:35 PM, KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki wrote:
> On Tue, 13 Jul 2010 10:51:58 -0500
> Nathan Fontenot <nfont@austin.ibm.com> wrote:
> 
>>>
>>> And for what purpose this interface is ? Does this split memory block into 2 pieces
>>> of the same size ?? sounds __very__ strange interface to me.
>>
>> Yes, this splits the memory_block into two blocks of the same size.  This was
>> suggested as something we may want to do.  From ppc perspective I am not sure we
>> would use this.
>>
>> The split functionality is not required.  The main goal of the patch set is to
>> reduce the number of memory sysfs directories created.  From a ppc perspective
>> the split functionality is not really needed.
>>
> 
> Okay, this is an offer from me.
> 
>   1. I think you can add an boot option as "don't create memory sysfs".
>      please do.

I posted a patch to do that a week or so ago, it didn't go over very well.

> 
>   2. I'd like to write a configfs module for handling memory hotplug even when
>      sysfs directroy is not created.
>      Because configfs support rmdir/mkdir, the user (ppc's daemon?) has to do
>      
>      When offlining section X.
>      # insmod configfs_memory.ko
>      # mount -t configfs none /configfs
>      # mkdir /configfs/memoryX
>      # echo offline > /configfs/memoryX/state
>      # rmdir /configfs/memoryX
> 
>   And making this operation as the default bahavior for all arch's memory hotplug may
>   be better...
> 
> Dave, how do you think ? Because ppc guys uses "probe" interface already,
> this can be handled... no ?

ppc would still require the existance of the 'probe' interface.

Are you objecting to the 'split' functionality?  If so I do not see any reason from ppc
perspective that it is needed.  This was something Dave suggested, unless I am missing
something.

Since ppc needs the 'probe' interface in sysfs, and for ppc having mutliple 
memory_block_sections reside under a single memory_block makes memory hotplug
simpler.  On ppc we do emory hotplug operations on an LMB size basis.  With my
patches this now lets us set each memory_block to span an LMB's worth of
memory.  Now we could do emory hotplug in a single operation instead of multiple
operations to offline/online all of the memory sections in an LMB.

Of course the easy solution would be to increase SECTION_SIZE_BITS, but we need
support hardware that can have LMB's from 16 MB to 256 MB in size so the
SECTION_SIZE_BITS value has to remain small. 

> 
> One problem is that I don't have enough knowledge about configfs..it seems complex.

Me neither, thoug I will take a look at it.

-Nathan


  reply	other threads:[~2010-07-14  3:18 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 40+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2010-07-12 15:27 [PATCH 0/7] De-couple sysfs memory directories from memory sections Nathan Fontenot
2010-07-12 15:42 ` [PATCH 1/7] Split the memory_block structure Nathan Fontenot
2010-07-13  6:18   ` KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki
2010-07-13  6:18     ` KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki
2010-07-13 15:44     ` Nathan Fontenot
2010-07-13 15:44       ` Nathan Fontenot
2010-07-13 14:00   ` Brian King
2010-07-13 14:00     ` Brian King
2010-07-13 15:59     ` Nathan Fontenot
2010-07-13 15:59       ` Nathan Fontenot
2010-07-12 15:43 ` [PATCH 2/7] Create the new 'end_phys_index' file Nathan Fontenot
2010-07-12 15:44 ` [PATCH 3/7] Update the [register,unregister]_memory routines Nathan Fontenot
2010-07-13  6:20   ` KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki
2010-07-13  6:20     ` KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki
2010-07-13 15:46     ` Nathan Fontenot
2010-07-13 15:46       ` Nathan Fontenot
2010-07-12 15:45 ` [PATCH 4/7] Allow sysfs memory directories to be split Nathan Fontenot
2010-07-13  6:28   ` KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki
2010-07-13  6:28     ` KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki
2010-07-13 15:51     ` Nathan Fontenot
2010-07-13 15:51       ` Nathan Fontenot
2010-07-14  0:35       ` KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki
2010-07-14  0:35         ` KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki
2010-07-14  3:18         ` Nathan Fontenot [this message]
2010-07-14  3:18           ` Nathan Fontenot
2010-07-14  3:25           ` KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki
2010-07-14  3:25             ` KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki
2010-07-14  8:30             ` KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki
2010-07-14  8:30               ` KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki
2010-07-14  3:26         ` Dave Hansen
2010-07-14  3:26           ` Dave Hansen
2010-07-14 17:16           ` Nathan Fontenot
2010-07-14 17:16             ` Nathan Fontenot
2010-07-12 15:46 ` [PATCH 5/7] update the mutex name in the memory_block struct Nathan Fontenot
2010-07-12 15:47 ` [PATCH 6/7] Update sysfs node routines for new sysfs memory directories Nathan Fontenot
2010-07-12 15:48 ` [PATCH 7/7] Enable multiple memory sections per sysfs memory directory for powerpc/pseries Nathan Fontenot
2010-07-16  7:13 ` [PATCH 0/7] De-couple sysfs memory directories from memory sections Greg KH
2010-07-16  7:13   ` Greg KH
2010-07-16 15:41   ` Nathan Fontenot
2010-07-16 15:41     ` Nathan Fontenot

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=4C3D2C6B.3050203@austin.ibm.com \
    --to=nfont@austin.ibm.com \
    --cc=dave@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
    --cc=kamezawa.hiroyu@jp.fujitsu.com \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linuxppc-dev@ozlabs.org \
    /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 an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.