* Michal Hocko <mhocko@xxxxxxxx> [2020-08-18 09:37:12]: > On Tue 18-08-20 09:32:52, David Hildenbrand wrote: > > On 12.08.20 08:01, Srikar Dronamraju wrote: > > > Hi Andrew, Michal, David > > > > > > * Andrew Morton <akpm@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> [2020-08-06 21:32:11]: > > > > > >> On Fri, 3 Jul 2020 18:28:23 +0530 Srikar Dronamraju <srikar@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > >> > > >>>> The memory hotplug changes that somehow because you can hotremove numa > > >>>> nodes and therefore make the nodemask sparse but that is not a common > > >>>> case. I am not sure what would happen if a completely new node was added > > >>>> and its corresponding node was already used by the renumbered one > > >>>> though. It would likely conflate the two I am afraid. But I am not sure > > >>>> this is really possible with x86 and a lack of a bug report would > > >>>> suggest that nobody is doing that at least. > > >>>> > > >> So... do we merge this patch or not? Seems that the overall view is > > >> "risky but nobody is likely to do anything better any time soon"? > > > > > > Can we decide on this one way or the other? > > > > Hmm, not sure who's the person to decide. I tend to prefer doing the > > node renaming, handling this in ppc code; > > Agreed. That would be a safer option. Okay, will send arch specific v6 version. > -- > Michal Hocko > SUSE Labs -- Thanks and Regards Srikar Dronamraju
