From: keith mannthey <kmannth@us.ibm.com>
To: KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki <kamezawa.hiroyu@jp.fujitsu.com>
Cc: lkml <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
lhms-devel <lhms-devel@lists.sourceforge.net>,
"y-goto@jp.fujitsu.com" <y-goto@jp.fujitsu.com>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@osdl.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] memory hotadd fixes [4/5] avoid check in acpi
Date: Thu, 03 Aug 2006 17:13:16 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <1154650396.5925.49.camel@keithlap> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20060803123604.0f909208.kamezawa.hiroyu@jp.fujitsu.com>
On Thu, 2006-08-03 at 12:36 +0900, KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki wrote:
> add_memory() does all necessary check to avoid collision.
> then, acpi layer doesn't have to check region by itself.
>
> (*) pfn_valid() just returns page struct is valid or not. It returns 0
> if a section has been already added even is ioresource is not added.
> ioresource collision check in mm/memory_hotplug.c can do more precise
> collistion check.
> added enabled bit check just for sanity check..
>
> Signed-Off-By: KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki <kamezawa.hiroyu@jp.fujitsu.com>
> - start_pfn = info->start_addr >> PAGE_SHIFT;
> - end_pfn = (info->start_addr + info->length - 1) >> PAGE_SHIFT;
> -
> - if (pfn_valid(start_pfn) || pfn_valid(end_pfn)) {
This check needs to go somewhare in the add path. I am thinking of a
validate_add_memory_area call in add_memory (that can also be flexable
to enable the reserve check of (this memory area in add_nodes).
It is a useful protection for the sparsemem add path. I would rather
the kernel be able to stand up to odd acpi namespaces or other
mechanisms of invoking add_memory.
Thanks,
Keith
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2006-08-04 0:34 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 22+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2006-08-03 3:36 [PATCH] memory hotadd fixes [4/5] avoid check in acpi KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki
2006-08-03 18:28 ` keith mannthey
2006-08-03 23:09 ` [Lhms-devel] " keith mannthey
2006-08-04 0:22 ` KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki
2006-08-04 0:13 ` keith mannthey [this message]
2006-08-04 0:44 ` KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki
2006-08-04 1:54 ` keith mannthey
2006-08-04 2:15 ` KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki
2006-08-04 2:32 ` [PATCH] memory hotadd fixes [6/5] enhance collistion check KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki
2006-08-04 3:09 ` keith mannthey
2006-08-04 3:19 ` KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki
2006-08-04 21:01 ` keith mannthey
2006-08-04 3:00 ` [PATCH] memory hotadd fixes [4/5] avoid check in acpi keith mannthey
2006-08-04 3:13 ` KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki
2006-08-04 3:23 ` keith mannthey
2006-08-04 3:48 ` KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki
2006-08-04 4:25 ` keith mannthey
2006-08-04 4:32 ` KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki
2006-08-04 8:23 ` Mika Penttilä
2006-08-04 8:32 ` keith mannthey
2006-08-04 5:46 ` Yasunori Goto
2006-08-04 5:59 ` [Lhms-devel] " KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=1154650396.5925.49.camel@keithlap \
--to=kmannth@us.ibm.com \
--cc=akpm@osdl.org \
--cc=kamezawa.hiroyu@jp.fujitsu.com \
--cc=lhms-devel@lists.sourceforge.net \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=y-goto@jp.fujitsu.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox