From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1751761AbdFJCUX (ORCPT ); Fri, 9 Jun 2017 22:20:23 -0400 Received: from mail-oi0-f67.google.com ([209.85.218.67]:34618 "EHLO mail-oi0-f67.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751562AbdFJCUV (ORCPT ); Fri, 9 Jun 2017 22:20:21 -0400 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <20170609104947.GD21764@dhcp22.suse.cz> References: <20170515085827.16474-1-mhocko@kernel.org> <20170609104947.GD21764@dhcp22.suse.cz> From: Wei Yang Date: Sat, 10 Jun 2017 10:20:00 +0800 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [PATCH -v4 0/14] mm: make movable onlining suck less To: Michal Hocko Cc: Andrew Morton , Linux-MM , Mel Gorman , Vlastimil Babka , Andrea Arcangeli , Jerome Glisse , Reza Arbab , Yasuaki Ishimatsu , qiuxishi@huawei.com, Kani Toshimitsu , slaoub@gmail.com, Joonsoo Kim , Andi Kleen , David Rientjes , Daniel Kiper , Igor Mammedov , Vitaly Kuznetsov , LKML , Balbir Singh , Dan Williams , Heiko Carstens , Martin Schwidefsky , Tobias Regnery , Yasuaki Ishimatsu Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Fri, Jun 9, 2017 at 6:49 PM, Michal Hocko wrote: > On Fri 09-06-17 17:51:24, Wei Yang wrote: >> Hi, Michal >> >> I am not that familiar with hotplug and trying to catch up the issue >> and your solution. >> >> One potential issue I found is we don't check the physical boundary >> when add_memory_resource(). >> >> For example, on x86-64, only 64T physical memory is supported currently. >> Looks it is expanded after 5-level pagetable is introduced. While there is >> still some limitations on this. But we don't check the boundary I think. >> >> During the bootup, this is ensured by the max_pfn which is guaranteed to >> be under MAX_ARCH_PFN. I don't see some limitation on this when doing >> hotplug. > > This might be true and I would have to double check but this rework > doesn't change anything in that regards. Or do I miss something? Ah, yes, I believe your patch set don't touch this area. This is just related to hotplug. > -- > Michal Hocko > SUSE Labs From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail-oi0-f72.google.com (mail-oi0-f72.google.com [209.85.218.72]) by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 98E086B0292 for ; Fri, 9 Jun 2017 22:20:22 -0400 (EDT) Received: by mail-oi0-f72.google.com with SMTP id w127so1686788oiw.11 for ; Fri, 09 Jun 2017 19:20:22 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-sor-f65.google.com (mail-sor-f65.google.com. [209.85.220.65]) by mx.google.com with SMTPS id q139sor855196oic.18.2017.06.09.19.20.21 for (Google Transport Security); Fri, 09 Jun 2017 19:20:21 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <20170609104947.GD21764@dhcp22.suse.cz> References: <20170515085827.16474-1-mhocko@kernel.org> <20170609104947.GD21764@dhcp22.suse.cz> From: Wei Yang Date: Sat, 10 Jun 2017 10:20:00 +0800 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [PATCH -v4 0/14] mm: make movable onlining suck less Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org List-ID: To: Michal Hocko Cc: Andrew Morton , Linux-MM , Mel Gorman , Vlastimil Babka , Andrea Arcangeli , Jerome Glisse , Reza Arbab , Yasuaki Ishimatsu , qiuxishi@huawei.com, Kani Toshimitsu , slaoub@gmail.com, Joonsoo Kim , Andi Kleen , David Rientjes , Daniel Kiper , Igor Mammedov , Vitaly Kuznetsov , LKML , Balbir Singh , Dan Williams , Heiko Carstens , Martin Schwidefsky , Tobias Regnery , Yasuaki Ishimatsu On Fri, Jun 9, 2017 at 6:49 PM, Michal Hocko wrote: > On Fri 09-06-17 17:51:24, Wei Yang wrote: >> Hi, Michal >> >> I am not that familiar with hotplug and trying to catch up the issue >> and your solution. >> >> One potential issue I found is we don't check the physical boundary >> when add_memory_resource(). >> >> For example, on x86-64, only 64T physical memory is supported currently. >> Looks it is expanded after 5-level pagetable is introduced. While there is >> still some limitations on this. But we don't check the boundary I think. >> >> During the bootup, this is ensured by the max_pfn which is guaranteed to >> be under MAX_ARCH_PFN. I don't see some limitation on this when doing >> hotplug. > > This might be true and I would have to double check but this rework > doesn't change anything in that regards. Or do I miss something? Ah, yes, I believe your patch set don't touch this area. This is just related to hotplug. > -- > Michal Hocko > SUSE Labs -- 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