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=-5.3 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00, 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 70B04C43460 for ; Wed, 21 Apr 2021 08:46:48 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 42D3F61437 for ; Wed, 21 Apr 2021 08:46:48 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S237557AbhDUIrT (ORCPT ); Wed, 21 Apr 2021 04:47:19 -0400 Received: from mx2.suse.de ([195.135.220.15]:39432 "EHLO mx2.suse.de" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S230319AbhDUIrR (ORCPT ); Wed, 21 Apr 2021 04:47:17 -0400 X-Virus-Scanned: by amavisd-new at test-mx.suse.de Received: from relay2.suse.de (unknown [195.135.221.27]) by mx2.suse.de (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5D7ACB1AE; Wed, 21 Apr 2021 08:46:44 +0000 (UTC) Date: Wed, 21 Apr 2021 10:46:41 +0200 From: Oscar Salvador To: Michal Hocko Cc: Andrew Morton , David Hildenbrand , Anshuman Khandual , Pavel Tatashin , Vlastimil Babka , linux-mm@kvack.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH v9 4/8] mm,memory_hotplug: Allocate memmap from the added memory range Message-ID: <20210421084641.GG22456@linux> References: <20210416112411.9826-1-osalvador@suse.de> <20210416112411.9826-5-osalvador@suse.de> <20210421081546.GD22456@linux> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.10.1 (2018-07-13) Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Wed, Apr 21, 2021 at 10:39:16AM +0200, Michal Hocko wrote: > Not that I would insist but I find it better to use common constructs > when it doesn't hurt readability. The order evaluation can be even done > in a trivial helper. Uhm, I will have a look how it looks. Maybe with a nice comment explaining what is going on can make it in. If not, I can always keep what we have atm. > As I've said I will not insist and this can be done in the follow up. > You are iterating over memory blocks just to refuse to do an operation > which can be split to several memory blocks. See > http://lkml.kernel.org/r/YFtPxH0CT5QZsnR1@dhcp22.suse.cz and follow > walk_memory_blocks(start, size, NULL, remove_memory_block_cb) Ok, thanks for the link. I will have a look, but I would rather do it as a follow-up. -- Oscar Salvador SUSE L3