From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Heiko Carstens Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH v5 12/19] memory-hotplug: introduce new function arch_remove_memory() Date: Mon, 30 Jul 2012 12:23:05 +0200 Message-ID: <20120730102305.GB3631@osiris.boeblingen.de.ibm.com> References: <50126B83.3050201@cn.fujitsu.com> <50126E2F.8010301@cn.fujitsu.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Return-path: Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <50126E2F.8010301@cn.fujitsu.com> Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org List-Archive: List-Post: To: Wen Congyang Cc: linux-mm@kvack.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org, linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org, linux-s390@vger.kernel.org, linux-sh@vger.kernel.org, linux-ia64@vger.kernel.org, cmetcalf@tilera.com, rientjes@google.com, liuj97@gmail.com, len.brown@intel.com, benh@kernel.crashing.org, paulus@samba.org, cl@linux.com, minchan.kim@gmail.com, akpm@linux-foundation.org, kosaki.motohiro@jp.fujitsu.com, Yasuaki ISIMATU List-ID: On Fri, Jul 27, 2012 at 06:32:15PM +0800, Wen Congyang wrote: > We don't call __add_pages() directly in the function add_memory() > because some other architecture related things need to be done > before or after calling __add_pages(). So we should introduce > a new function arch_remove_memory() to revert the things > done in arch_add_memory(). > > Note: the function for s390 is not implemented(I don't know how to > implement it for s390). There is no hardware or firmware interface which could trigger a hot memory remove on s390. So there is nothing that needs to be implemented. -- 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