From: Michal Hocko <email@example.com>
To: David Hildenbrand <firstname.lastname@example.org>
Cc: Anshuman Khandual <email@example.com>,
firstname.lastname@example.org, Dan Williams <email@example.com>,
Yu Zhao <firstname.lastname@example.org>, Hsin-Yi Wang <email@example.com>,
Thomas Gleixner <firstname.lastname@example.org>,
Steve Capper <email@example.com>,
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/2] arm64/hotplug: Process MEM_OFFLINE and MEM_CANCEL_OFFLINE events
Date: Wed, 15 Apr 2020 12:16:18 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20200415101618.GD4629@dhcp22.suse.cz> (raw)
On Wed 15-04-20 09:35:33, David Hildenbrand wrote:
> On 15.04.20 08:39, Anshuman Khandual wrote:
> > This series improves arm64 memory event notifier (hot remove) robustness by
> > enabling it to detect potential problems (if any) in the future. But first
> > it enumerates memory isolation failure reasons that can be sent across a
> > notifier. This series does not go beyond arm64 to explore if these failure
> > reason codes could be used in other existing registered memory notifiers.
> > Please do let me know if there is any other potential use cases, will be
> > happy to incorporate next time around. Also should we add similar failure
> > reasons for online_pages() as well ?
> > This series has been tested on arm64, boot tested on x86 and build tested
> > on multiple other platforms.
> I'm sorry, but I have to nack this series. Why?
> 1. A hotplug notifier should not have to bother why offlining failed. He
> received a MEM_GOING_OFFLINE, followed by a MEM_CANCEL_OFFLINE. That's
> all he really has to know. Undo what you've done, end of story.
> 2. Patch 2 just introduces dead code that should never happen unless
> something is horribly broken in the core (memory offlined although
> nacked from notifier). And, it (for *whatever reason*) thinks it's okay
> to bail out if another noYtifier canceled offlining hotplugged memory.
> I fail to see the benefit for core changes and
Agreed! If arm64 wants to check and report early bootmem memory
offlining then just do it. There is no reason to add a whole machinery
for that. Cancel notifier is indeed only supposed to restore the state
> 4 files changed, 99 insertions(+), 13 deletions(-)
prev parent reply other threads:[~2020-04-15 10:16 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 5+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2020-04-15 6:39 [PATCH 0/2] arm64/hotplug: Process MEM_OFFLINE and MEM_CANCEL_OFFLINE events Anshuman Khandual
2020-04-15 6:39 ` [PATCH 1/2] mm/hotplug: Enumerate memory range offlining failure reasons Anshuman Khandual
2020-04-15 6:39 ` [PATCH 2/2] arm64/hotplug: Process MEM_OFFLINE and MEM_CANCEL_OFFLINE Anshuman Khandual
2020-04-15 7:35 ` [PATCH 0/2] arm64/hotplug: Process MEM_OFFLINE and MEM_CANCEL_OFFLINE events David Hildenbrand
2020-04-15 10:16 ` Michal Hocko [this message]
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:
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
* 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).