Re: [RFC PATCH v5 12/19] memory-hotplug: introduce new function arch_remove_memory()
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
- To: Wen Congyang <wency@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH v5 12/19] memory-hotplug: introduce new function arch_remove_memory()
- From: Heiko Carstens <heiko.carstens@xxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Mon, 30 Jul 2012 12:23:05 +0200
- Cc: linux-mm@xxxxxxxxx, linux-kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, linuxppc-dev@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, linux-acpi@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, linux-s390@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, linux-sh@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, linux-ia64@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, cmetcalf@xxxxxxxxxx, rientjes@xxxxxxxxxx, liuj97@xxxxxxxxx, len.brown@xxxxxxxxx, benh@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, paulus@xxxxxxxxx, cl@xxxxxxxxx, minchan.kim@xxxxxxxxx, akpm@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, kosaki.motohiro@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx, Yasuaki ISIMATU <isimatu.yasuaki@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- In-reply-to: <50126E2F.8010301@cn.fujitsu.com>
- List-id: <linux-ia64.vger.kernel.org>
- References: <50126B83.3050201@cn.fujitsu.com> <50126E2F.8010301@cn.fujitsu.com>
- User-agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15)
On Fri, Jul 27, 2012 at 06:32:15PM +0800, Wen Congyang wrote:
> We don't call __add_pages() directly in the function add_memory()
> because some other architecture related things need to be done
> before or after calling __add_pages(). So we should introduce
> a new function arch_remove_memory() to revert the things
> done in arch_add_memory().
>
> Note: the function for s390 is not implemented(I don't know how to
> implement it for s390).
There is no hardware or firmware interface which could trigger a
hot memory remove on s390. So there is nothing that needs to be
implemented.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-ia64" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
[Index of Archives]
[Linux Kernel]
[Sparc Linux]
[DCCP]
[Linux ARM]
[Yosemite News]
[Linux SCSI]
[Linux x86_64]
[Linux for Ham Radio]