From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail203.messagelabs.com (mail203.messagelabs.com [216.82.254.243]) by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 5EBC96B01EE for ; Thu, 13 May 2010 22:55:43 -0400 (EDT) Date: Fri, 14 May 2010 10:01:35 +0800 From: Wu Fengguang Subject: Re: [RFC, 3/7] NUMA hotplug emulator Message-ID: <20100514020135.GA7678@localhost> References: <20100513114835.GD2169@shaohui> <20100513165511.GB25212@suse.de> <20100514014535.GA4381@shaohui> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20100514014535.GA4381@shaohui> Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org To: Greg KH , akpm@linux-foundation.org, linux-mm@kvack.org, Thomas Gleixner , Ingo Molnar , "H. Peter Anvin" , x86@kernel.org, Hidetoshi Seto , David Rientjes , Alex Chiang , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, ak@linux.intel.com, haicheng.li@linux.intel.com, shaohui.zheng@linux.intel.com List-ID: On Fri, May 14, 2010 at 09:45:35AM +0800, Zheng, Shaohui wrote: > On Thu, May 13, 2010 at 09:55:11AM -0700, Greg KH wrote: > > On Thu, May 13, 2010 at 07:48:35PM +0800, Shaohui Zheng wrote: > > > Userland interface to hotplug-add fake offlined nodes. > > > > Why include 2 copies of the patch in one email? > I always try to attach the patch as attachment, it is the same with the mail > content, I guess it should take convenience when you need to save the patch > to local, it might be a bad habbit, I will be careful when I send patch next time. > thanks for the reminding. Shaohui, git/quilt are great tools for submitting patch series. > > > > > Add a sysfs entry "probe" under /sys/devices/system/node/: > > > > > > - to show all fake offlined nodes: > > > $ cat /sys/devices/system/node/probe > > > > > > - to hotadd a fake offlined node, e.g. nodeid is N: > > > $ echo N > /sys/devices/system/node/probe > > > > As you are trying to add a new sysfs file, please create the matching > > Documentation/ABI/ file as well. > > Agree, We will document it in. > > > > > Also note that sysfs files are "one value per file", which I don't think > > this file follows, right? > > Agree, the cpu/probe interface should write only, and we should create another > file to indicate the hidden nodes, such as cpu/hidden. We will follow this rule > when we send the formal patch. I'd prefer to avoid new interfaces if not absolutely necessary. Thanks, Fengguang -- 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: email@kvack.org