From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1753172AbYIEX6n (ORCPT ); Fri, 5 Sep 2008 19:58:43 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1751646AbYIEX6f (ORCPT ); Fri, 5 Sep 2008 19:58:35 -0400 Received: from one.firstfloor.org ([213.235.205.2]:45791 "EHLO one.firstfloor.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751635AbYIEX6e (ORCPT ); Fri, 5 Sep 2008 19:58:34 -0400 Date: Sat, 6 Sep 2008 02:01:54 +0200 From: Andi Kleen To: Gary Hade Cc: Andi Kleen , linux-mm@kvack.org, Andrew Morton , Yasunori Goto , Badari Pulavarty , Mel Gorman , Chris McDermott , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, x86@kernel.org, Ingo Molnar Subject: Re: [PATCH] [RESEND] x86_64: add memory hotremove config option Message-ID: <20080906000154.GC18288@one.firstfloor.org> References: <20080905172132.GA11692@us.ibm.com> <87ej3yv588.fsf@basil.nowhere.org> <20080905195314.GE11692@us.ibm.com> <20080905200401.GA18288@one.firstfloor.org> <20080905215452.GF11692@us.ibm.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20080905215452.GF11692@us.ibm.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.4.2.1i Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org > I am not sure if I understand why you appear to be opposed to > enabling the hotremove function before all the issues related I'm quite sceptical that it can be ever made to work in a useful way for real hardware (as opposed to an hypervisor para virtual setup for which this interface is not the right way -- it should be done in some specific driver instead) And if it cannot be made to work then it will be a false promise to the user. They will see it and think it will work, but it will not. This means I don't see a real use case for this feature. -Andi