On Tue, May 21, 2019 at 12:41:50PM +0200, David Hildenbrand wrote: > On 14.05.19 10:23, Mike Rapoport wrote: > > The "Locking Internals" section of the memory-hotplug documentation is > > duplicated in admin-guide and core-api. Drop the admin-guide copy as > > locking internals does not belong there. > > > > While on it, move the "Future Work" section to the core-api part. > > Looks sane, but the future work part is really outdated, can we remove > this completely? > > > > > Signed-off-by: Mike Rapoport <rppt@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> > > --- > > + > > +Future Work > > +=========== > > + > > + - allowing memory hot-add to ZONE_MOVABLE. maybe we need some switch like > > + sysctl or new control file. > > ... that already works if I am not completely missing the point here > > > + - showing memory block and physical device relationship. > > ... that is available for s390x only AFAIK > > > + - test and make it better memory offlining. > > ... no big news ;) > > > + - support HugeTLB page migration and offlining. > > ... I remember that Oscar was doing something in that area, Oscar? > > > + - memmap removing at memory offline. > > ... no, we don't want this. However, we should properly clean up zone > information when offlining > > > + - physical remove memory. > > ... I don't even understand what that means. > > > I'd vote for removing the future work part, this is pretty outdated. Frankly, I haven't looked at the details, just simply moved the text over. I don't mind sending another mechanical patch that removes the future work part. But it would be far better if somebody who's actively working on memory hotplug would replace it with a description how this actually works ;-) > -- > > Thanks, > > David / dhildenb > -- Sincerely yours, Mike.
