From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S932793AbcITRp0 (ORCPT ); Tue, 20 Sep 2016 13:45:26 -0400 Received: from mga03.intel.com ([134.134.136.65]:17098 "EHLO mga03.intel.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1754246AbcITRpZ (ORCPT ); Tue, 20 Sep 2016 13:45:25 -0400 X-ExtLoop1: 1 X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.30,369,1470726000"; d="scan'208";a="11829938" Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/1] memory offline issues with hugepage size > memory block size To: Mike Kravetz , Gerald Schaefer , Andrew Morton , Naoya Horiguchi References: <20160920155354.54403-1-gerald.schaefer@de.ibm.com> Cc: linux-mm@kvack.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Michal Hocko , "Kirill A . Shutemov" , Vlastimil Babka , "Aneesh Kumar K . V" , Martin Schwidefsky , Heiko Carstens , Rui Teng From: Dave Hansen Message-ID: <57E175B3.1040802@linux.intel.com> Date: Tue, 20 Sep 2016 10:45:23 -0700 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:38.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/38.8.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On 09/20/2016 10:37 AM, Mike Kravetz wrote: > > Their approach (I believe) would be to fail the offline operation in > this case. However, I could argue that failing the operation, or > dissolving the unused huge page containing the area to be offlined is > the right thing to do. I think the right thing to do is dissolve the whole huge page if even a part of it is offlined. The only question is what to do with the gigantic remnants. From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail-pf0-f198.google.com (mail-pf0-f198.google.com [209.85.192.198]) by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 82C176B0038 for ; Tue, 20 Sep 2016 13:45:25 -0400 (EDT) Received: by mail-pf0-f198.google.com with SMTP id n24so49228785pfb.0 for ; Tue, 20 Sep 2016 10:45:25 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mga04.intel.com (mga04.intel.com. [192.55.52.120]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id qi7si35303533pac.183.2016.09.20.10.45.24 for (version=TLS1 cipher=AES128-SHA bits=128/128); Tue, 20 Sep 2016 10:45:24 -0700 (PDT) Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/1] memory offline issues with hugepage size > memory block size References: <20160920155354.54403-1-gerald.schaefer@de.ibm.com> From: Dave Hansen Message-ID: <57E175B3.1040802@linux.intel.com> Date: Tue, 20 Sep 2016 10:45:23 -0700 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org List-ID: To: Mike Kravetz , Gerald Schaefer , Andrew Morton , Naoya Horiguchi Cc: linux-mm@kvack.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Michal Hocko , "Kirill A . Shutemov" , Vlastimil Babka , "Aneesh Kumar K . V" , Martin Schwidefsky , Heiko Carstens , Rui Teng On 09/20/2016 10:37 AM, Mike Kravetz wrote: > > Their approach (I believe) would be to fail the offline operation in > this case. However, I could argue that failing the operation, or > dissolving the unused huge page containing the area to be offlined is > the right thing to do. I think the right thing to do is dissolve the whole huge page if even a part of it is offlined. The only question is what to do with the gigantic remnants. -- To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in the body to majordomo@kvack.org. For more info on Linux MM, see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ . Don't email: email@kvack.org