From: Anshuman Khandual <anshuman.khandual@arm.com>
To: Gavin Shan <gshan@redhat.com>, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
Cc: Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@arm.com>,
Will Deacon <will@kernel.com>,
Steve Capper <steve.capper@arm.com>,
catalin.marinas@arm.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
Mark Brown <broonie@kernel.org>, Marc Zyngier <maz@kernel.org>,
will@kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH V3 1/3] arm64/mm/hotplug: Register boot memory hot remove notifier earlier
Date: Thu, 24 Sep 2020 08:53:47 +0530 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <ca813890-7e1d-62fb-d284-ea45609f78ff@arm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <bde102b0-7054-ae1d-d5d2-6348f4049d13@redhat.com>
On 09/23/2020 11:34 AM, Gavin Shan wrote:
> Hi Anshuman,
>
> On 9/21/20 10:05 PM, Anshuman Khandual wrote:
>> This moves memory notifier registration earlier in the boot process from
>> device_initcall() to early_initcall() which will help in guarding against
>> potential early boot memory offline requests. Even though there should not
>> be any actual offlinig requests till memory block devices are initialized
>> with memory_dev_init() but then generic init sequence might just change in
>> future. Hence an early registration for the memory event notifier would be
>> helpful. While here, just skip the registration if CONFIG_MEMORY_HOTREMOVE
>> is not enabled and also call out when memory notifier registration fails.
>>
>> Cc: Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@arm.com>
>> Cc: Will Deacon <will@kernel.com>
>> Cc: Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@arm.com>
>> Cc: Marc Zyngier <maz@kernel.org>
>> Cc: Steve Capper <steve.capper@arm.com>
>> Cc: Mark Brown <broonie@kernel.org>
>> Cc: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
>> Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
>> Signed-off-by: Anshuman Khandual <anshuman.khandual@arm.com>
>> ---
>> arch/arm64/mm/mmu.c | 14 ++++++++++++--
>> 1 file changed, 12 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
>>
>
> With the following nit-picky comments resolved:
>
> Reviewed-by: Gavin Shan <gshan@redhat.com>
>
>> diff --git a/arch/arm64/mm/mmu.c b/arch/arm64/mm/mmu.c
>> index 75df62fea1b6..df3b7415b128 100644
>> --- a/arch/arm64/mm/mmu.c
>> +++ b/arch/arm64/mm/mmu.c
>> @@ -1499,7 +1499,17 @@ static struct notifier_block prevent_bootmem_remove_nb = {
>> static int __init prevent_bootmem_remove_init(void)
>> {
>> - return register_memory_notifier(&prevent_bootmem_remove_nb);
>> + int ret = 0;
>> +
>> + if (!IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_MEMORY_HOTREMOVE))
>> + return ret;
>> +
>> + ret = register_memory_notifier(&prevent_bootmem_remove_nb);
>> + if (!ret)
>> + return ret;
>> +
>> + pr_err("Notifier registration failed - boot memory can be removed\n");
>> + return ret;
>> }
>
> It might be cleaner if the duplicated return statements can be
> avoided. Besides, it's always nice to print the errno even though
Thought about it, just that the error message was too long.
> zero is always returned from register_memory_notifier(). So I guess
> you probably need something like below:
>
> ret = register_memory_notifier(&prevent_bootmem_remove_nb);
> if (ret)
> pr_err("%s: Error %d registering notifier\n", __func__, ret)
>
> return ret;
Sure, will do.
>
>
> register_memory_notifier # 0 is returned on !CONFIG_MEMORY_HOTPLUG_SPARSE
> blocking_notifier_chain_register
> notifier_chain_register # 0 is always returned
>
>> -device_initcall(prevent_bootmem_remove_init);
>> +early_initcall(prevent_bootmem_remove_init);
>> #endif
>>
>
> Cheers,
> Gavin
>
>
_______________________________________________
linux-arm-kernel mailing list
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2020-09-24 3:27 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 9+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2020-09-21 12:05 [PATCH V3 0/3] arm64/mm/hotplug: Improve memory offline event notifier Anshuman Khandual
2020-09-21 12:05 ` [PATCH V3 1/3] arm64/mm/hotplug: Register boot memory hot remove notifier earlier Anshuman Khandual
2020-09-23 6:04 ` Gavin Shan
2020-09-24 3:23 ` Anshuman Khandual [this message]
2020-09-21 12:05 ` [PATCH V3 2/3] arm64/mm/hotplug: Enable MEM_OFFLINE event handling Anshuman Khandual
2020-09-23 4:44 ` Anshuman Khandual
2020-09-23 6:31 ` Gavin Shan
2020-09-24 3:51 ` Anshuman Khandual
2020-09-21 12:05 ` [PATCH V3 3/3] arm64/mm/hotplug: Ensure early memory sections are all online Anshuman Khandual
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=ca813890-7e1d-62fb-d284-ea45609f78ff@arm.com \
--to=anshuman.khandual@arm.com \
--cc=broonie@kernel.org \
--cc=catalin.marinas@arm.com \
--cc=gshan@redhat.com \
--cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mark.rutland@arm.com \
--cc=maz@kernel.org \
--cc=steve.capper@arm.com \
--cc=will@kernel.com \
--cc=will@kernel.org \
/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;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).