From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Date: Mon, 5 Aug 2013 13:11:12 +1000 From: Michael Ellerman To: Nathan Fontenot Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/8] Mark powerpc memory resources as busy Message-ID: <20130805031111.GA5347@concordia> References: <51F01E06.6090800@linux.vnet.ibm.com> <51F01EB2.9060802@linux.vnet.ibm.com> <20130802022827.GB1680@concordia> <51FC0315.1010601@linux.vnet.ibm.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii In-Reply-To: <51FC0315.1010601@linux.vnet.ibm.com> Cc: linux-mm , isimatu.yasuaki@jp.fujitsu.com, linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org, LKML , Greg Kroah-Hartman List-Id: Linux on PowerPC Developers Mail List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , On Fri, Aug 02, 2013 at 02:05:57PM -0500, Nathan Fontenot wrote: > On 08/01/2013 09:28 PM, Michael Ellerman wrote: > > On Wed, Jul 24, 2013 at 01:36:34PM -0500, Nathan Fontenot wrote: > >> Memory I/O resources need to be marked as busy or else we cannot remove > >> them when doing memory hot remove. > > > > I would have thought it was the opposite? > > Me too. > > As it turns out the code in kernel/resource.c checks to make sure the > IORESOURCE_BUSY flag is set when trying to release a resource. OK, I guess there's probably some sane reason, but it does seem backward. cheers