Re: [PATCH 6/6] mem-hotplug: Introduce movablenode boot option

[Zhang Yanfei <zhangyanfei.yes@gmail.com>]

Hello toshi-san

On 09/25/2013 12:00 AM, Toshi Kani wrote:
> On Tue, 2013-09-24 at 23:24 +0800, Zhang Yanfei wrote:
>> Hello tejun,
>>
>> On 09/24/2013 09:31 PM, Zhang Yanfei wrote:
>>>> This came up during earlier review but never was addressed.  Is
>>>>> "movablenode" the right name?  Shouldn't it be something which
>>>>> explicitly shows that it's to prepare for memory hotplug?  Also, maybe
>>>>> the above param should generate warning if CONFIG_MOVABLE_NODE isn't
>>>>> enabled?
>>> hmmm...as for the option name, if this option is set, it means, the kernel
>>> could support the functionality that a whole node is the so called
>>> movable node, which only has ZONE MOVABLE zone in it. So we choose
>>> to name the parameter "movablenode".
>>>
>>> As for the warning, will add it.
>>
>> I am now preparing the v5 version. Only in this patch we haven't come to an
>> agreement. So as for the boot option name, after my explanation, do you still
>> have the objection? Or you could suggest a good name for us, that'll be
>> very thankful:)
> 
> I do not think the granularity has to stay as a node, and this option
> does nothing to with other devices that may be included in a node.  So,
> how about using "movablemem"?
> 

As I explained before, we use movablenode to mean a node could only have
a MOVABLE zone from the memory aspect. So I still think movablenode seems
better than movablemem. movablemem seems vaguer here....

-- 
Thanks.
Zhang Yanfei

--
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>