From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S932278Ab2LMCiP (ORCPT ); Wed, 12 Dec 2012 21:38:15 -0500 Received: from szxga02-in.huawei.com ([119.145.14.65]:59341 "EHLO szxga02-in.huawei.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1756429Ab2LMCg7 (ORCPT ); Wed, 12 Dec 2012 21:36:59 -0500 Message-ID: <50C93F36.4030402@huawei.com> Date: Thu, 13 Dec 2012 10:36:38 +0800 From: Jiang Liu User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 5.1; rv:9.0) Gecko/20111222 Thunderbird/9.0.1 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: "Liu, Jinsong" CC: Wen Congyang , "Rafael J. Wysocki" , Toshi Kani , "Wysocki, Rafael J" , "lenb@kernel.org" , "linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org" , "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" , Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk Subject: Re: [PATCH] X86/acpi: remove redundant logic of acpi memory hotadd References: <4326596.xCAz7vOgOp@vostro.rjw.lan> <50C2A752.8010709@cn.fujitsu.com> In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Originating-IP: [10.108.108.229] X-CFilter-Loop: Reflected Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On 2012-12-12 22:37, Liu, Jinsong wrote: > Wen Congyang wrote: >> At 12/08/2012 06:19 AM, Rafael J. Wysocki Wrote: >>> On Tuesday, December 04, 2012 01:39:54 AM Liu, Jinsong wrote: >>>> Resend it, add Rafael and linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org >>> >>> I wonder what memory hotplug people think about that. >>> >>> Thanks, >>> Rafael >>> >>> >>>> =============== >>>> From 1d39279e45c54ce531691da5ffe261e7689dd92c Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 >>>> 2001 >>>> From: Liu Jinsong >>>> Date: Wed, 14 Nov 2012 18:52:06 +0800 >>>> Subject: [PATCH] X86/acpi: remove redundant logic of acpi memory >>>> hotadd >>>> >>>> When memory hotadd, acpi_memory_enable_device has already been done >>>> at drv->ops.add (acpi_memory_device_add), no need to do it again >>>> at notify callback. >>>> >>>> At acpi_memory_enable_device, acpi_memory_get_device_resources >>>> is also a redundant action, since it has been done at drv->ops.add. >>>> >>>> Signed-off-by: Liu Jinsong >>>> --- >>>> drivers/acpi/acpi_memhotplug.c | 17 ----------------- >>>> 1 files changed, 0 insertions(+), 17 deletions(-) >>>> >>>> diff --git a/drivers/acpi/acpi_memhotplug.c >>>> b/drivers/acpi/acpi_memhotplug.c >>>> index 24c807f..a6489fd 100644 >>>> --- a/drivers/acpi/acpi_memhotplug.c >>>> +++ b/drivers/acpi/acpi_memhotplug.c >>>> @@ -220,15 +220,6 @@ static int acpi_memory_enable_device(struct >>>> acpi_memory_device *mem_device) struct acpi_memory_info *info; >>>> int node; >>>> >>>> - >>>> - /* Get the range from the _CRS */ >>>> - result = acpi_memory_get_device_resources(mem_device); >>>> - if (result) { >>>> - printk(KERN_ERR PREFIX "get_device_resources failed\n"); >>>> - mem_device->state = MEMORY_INVALID_STATE; >>>> - return result; >>>> - } >>>> - >>>> node = acpi_get_node(mem_device->device->handle); /* >>>> * Tell the VM there is more memory here... >>>> @@ -357,14 +348,6 @@ static void >>>> acpi_memory_device_notify(acpi_handle handle, u32 event, void >>>> *data) break; } >>>> >>>> - if (acpi_memory_check_device(mem_device)) >>>> - break; >> >> Hmm, if acpi_memory_check_device() fails, it means the memory device >> disappears >> I don't know if a real hardware uses this way to remove memory device. >> >>>> - >>>> - if (acpi_memory_enable_device(mem_device)) { >>>> - printk(KERN_ERR PREFIX "Cannot enable memory device\n"); >>>> - break; >>>> - } >> >> If acpi_memory_get_device() doesn't fail, it means that the device >> has been managed by this driver, so I think we can do this cleanup. >> >> Thanks >> Wen Congyang >> > > Thanks! any comments from Huawei side, Jiang? Hi Jinsong, We think it's ok. acpi_memory_device_notify acpi_memory_get_device acpi_memory_device_add acpi_memory_get_device_resources acpi_memory_enable_device acpi_memory_get_device_resources（redundant） acpi_memory_check_device（redundant） acpi_memory_enable_device（redundant）