From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.5 required=3.0 tests=HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS, MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS,USER_AGENT_SANE_1 autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5B936C5B578 for ; Mon, 1 Jul 2019 04:05:15 +0000 (UTC) Received: from lists.ozlabs.org (lists.ozlabs.org [203.11.71.2]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id A6D92208CA for ; Mon, 1 Jul 2019 04:05:14 +0000 (UTC) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 mail.kernel.org A6D92208CA Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dmarc=fail (p=none dis=none) header.from=linux.vnet.ibm.com Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=linuxppc-dev-bounces+linuxppc-dev=archiver.kernel.org@lists.ozlabs.org Received: from lists.ozlabs.org (lists.ozlabs.org [IPv6:2401:3900:2:1::3]) by lists.ozlabs.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 45cYgD43sYzDqVb for ; Mon, 1 Jul 2019 14:05:12 +1000 (AEST) Authentication-Results: lists.ozlabs.org; spf=none (mailfrom) smtp.mailfrom=linux.vnet.ibm.com (client-ip=148.163.158.5; helo=mx0a-001b2d01.pphosted.com; envelope-from=aravinda@linux.vnet.ibm.com; receiver=) Authentication-Results: lists.ozlabs.org; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=linux.vnet.ibm.com Received: from mx0a-001b2d01.pphosted.com (mx0b-001b2d01.pphosted.com [148.163.158.5]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by lists.ozlabs.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 45cYdN1ddyzDqSC for ; Mon, 1 Jul 2019 14:03:35 +1000 (AEST) Received: from pps.filterd (m0098420.ppops.net [127.0.0.1]) by mx0b-001b2d01.pphosted.com (8.16.0.27/8.16.0.27) with SMTP id x6141TOc170121 for ; Mon, 1 Jul 2019 00:03:30 -0400 Received: from e35.co.us.ibm.com (e35.co.us.ibm.com [32.97.110.153]) by mx0b-001b2d01.pphosted.com with ESMTP id 2tfa6fs7p3-1 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NOT) for ; Mon, 01 Jul 2019 00:03:30 -0400 Received: from localhost by e35.co.us.ibm.com with IBM ESMTP SMTP Gateway: Authorized Use Only! Violators will be prosecuted for from ; Mon, 1 Jul 2019 05:03:29 +0100 Received: from b03cxnp08028.gho.boulder.ibm.com (9.17.130.20) by e35.co.us.ibm.com (192.168.1.135) with IBM ESMTP SMTP Gateway: Authorized Use Only! Violators will be prosecuted; (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256/256) Mon, 1 Jul 2019 05:03:27 +0100 Received: from b03ledav006.gho.boulder.ibm.com (b03ledav006.gho.boulder.ibm.com [9.17.130.237]) by b03cxnp08028.gho.boulder.ibm.com (8.14.9/8.14.9/NCO v10.0) with ESMTP id x6143QPk56951218 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=OK); Mon, 1 Jul 2019 04:03:26 GMT Received: from b03ledav006.gho.boulder.ibm.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by IMSVA (Postfix) with ESMTP id A6574C6057; Mon, 1 Jul 2019 04:03:26 +0000 (GMT) Received: from b03ledav006.gho.boulder.ibm.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by IMSVA (Postfix) with ESMTP id 44CFBC605B; Mon, 1 Jul 2019 04:03:25 +0000 (GMT) Received: from [9.124.31.66] (unknown [9.124.31.66]) by b03ledav006.gho.boulder.ibm.com (Postfix) with ESMTP; Mon, 1 Jul 2019 04:03:24 +0000 (GMT) Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] powerpc/pseries: Fix maximum memory value To: Nathan Lynch References: <156170480663.26214.11212383510892156924.stgit@aravinda> <87tvc9sjrb.fsf@linux.ibm.com> From: Aravinda Prasad Date: Mon, 1 Jul 2019 09:33:24 +0530 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:52.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/52.6.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <87tvc9sjrb.fsf@linux.ibm.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Language: en-US Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-TM-AS-GCONF: 00 x-cbid: 19070104-0012-0000-0000-0000174A94FF X-IBM-SpamModules-Scores: X-IBM-SpamModules-Versions: BY=3.00011358; HX=3.00000242; KW=3.00000007; PH=3.00000004; SC=3.00000286; SDB=6.01225722; UDB=6.00645232; IPR=6.01006934; MB=3.00027534; MTD=3.00000008; XFM=3.00000015; UTC=2019-07-01 04:03:28 X-IBM-AV-DETECTION: SAVI=unused REMOTE=unused XFE=unused x-cbparentid: 19070104-0013-0000-0000-000057E56D31 Message-Id: <52df9ec5-4bca-697f-3d2a-9b720c346547@linux.vnet.ibm.com> X-Proofpoint-Virus-Version: vendor=fsecure engine=2.50.10434:, , definitions=2019-07-01_02:, , signatures=0 X-Proofpoint-Spam-Details: rule=outbound_notspam policy=outbound score=0 priorityscore=1501 malwarescore=0 suspectscore=0 phishscore=0 bulkscore=0 spamscore=0 clxscore=1015 lowpriorityscore=0 mlxscore=0 impostorscore=0 mlxlogscore=999 adultscore=0 classifier=spam adjust=0 reason=mlx scancount=1 engine=8.0.1-1810050000 definitions=main-1907010049 X-BeenThere: linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: Linux on PowerPC Developers Mail List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Cc: naveen.n.rao@linux.vnet.ibm.com, linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org Errors-To: linuxppc-dev-bounces+linuxppc-dev=archiver.kernel.org@lists.ozlabs.org Sender: "Linuxppc-dev" On Friday 28 June 2019 10:57 PM, Nathan Lynch wrote: > Aravinda Prasad writes: >> Calculating the maximum memory based on the number of lmbs >> and lmb size does not account for the RMA region. Hence >> use memory_hotplug_max(), which already accounts for the >> RMA region, to fetch the maximum memory value. Thanks to >> Nathan Lynch for suggesting the memory_hotplug_max() >> function. > > Well, I hope I haven't led you astray... will it give you the desired > result on a kernel configured without memory hotplug support, booted in > an LPAR with some huge pages configured? Yes. I have tested the patch both with CONFIG_MEMORY_HOTPLUG set and not set. It is working as expected. Regards, Aravinda > > If so, then > Acked-by: Nathan Lynch > > It would likely help with review and future maintenance if the semantics > and intended use of the MaxMem field are made a little more > explicit. For example, is it supposed to include persistent memory? > Perhaps a follow-up patch could address this. Or maybe I'm overthinking > it. > -- Regards, Aravinda