On Mon, Dec 4, 2017 at 12:28 PM, Andrea Reale <ar@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > Hi Joey, > > and thanks for your comments. Response inline: > [cut] >> >> So, the BUG() is useful to capture state issue in memory subsystem. But, I >> understood your concern about the two steps offline/remove from userland. >> >> Maybe we should move the BUG() to somewhere but not just remove it. Or if >> we think that the BUG() is too intense, at least we should print out a error >> message, and ACPI should checks the return value from subsystem to >> interrupt memory-hotplug process. > > In this patchset, BUG() is moved to acpi_memory_remove_memory(), > the caller of arch_remove_memory(). However, I agree with Michal, that > we should not BUG() here but rather halt the hotremove process and print > some errors. > Is there any state in ACPI that should be undone in case of hotremove > errors or we can just stop the process "halfway"? I have to recall a couple of things before answering this question, so that may take some time. Thanks, Rafael -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-acpi" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
