From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mx2.suse.de ([195.135.220.15]:52840 "EHLO mx1.suse.de" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-FAIL) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1728035AbfGAJgu (ORCPT ); Mon, 1 Jul 2019 05:36:50 -0400 Date: Mon, 1 Jul 2019 11:36:44 +0200 From: Oscar Salvador Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 10/11] mm/memory_hotplug: Make unregister_memory_block_under_nodes() never fail Message-ID: <20190701093640.GA17349@linux> References: <20190527111152.16324-1-david@redhat.com> <20190527111152.16324-11-david@redhat.com> <20190701085144.GJ6376@dhcp22.suse.cz> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20190701085144.GJ6376@dhcp22.suse.cz> Sender: linux-s390-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: To: Michal Hocko Cc: David Hildenbrand , linux-mm@kvack.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-ia64@vger.kernel.org, linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org, linux-s390@vger.kernel.org, linux-sh@vger.kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, akpm@linux-foundation.org, Dan Williams , Wei Yang , Igor Mammedov , Greg Kroah-Hartman , "Rafael J. Wysocki" , Alex Deucher , "David S. Miller" , Mark Brown , Chris Wilson , Jonathan Cameron On Mon, Jul 01, 2019 at 10:51:44AM +0200, Michal Hocko wrote: > Yeah, we do not allow to offline multi zone (node) ranges so the current > code seems to be over engineered. > > Anyway, I am wondering why do we have to strictly check for already > removed nodes links. Is the sysfs code going to complain we we try to > remove again? No, sysfs will silently "fail" if the symlink has already been removed. At least that is what I saw last time I played with it. I guess the question is what if sysfs handling changes in the future and starts dropping warnings when trying to remove a symlink is not there. Maybe that is unlikely to happen? -- Oscar Salvador SUSE L3