Hi Rafael,
Please see below.
On 05/04/2013 07:21 PM, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
......
static BLOCKING_NOTIFIER_HEAD(memory_chain);
@@ -278,33 +283,64 @@ static int __memory_block_change_state(s
{
int ret = 0;
- if (mem->state != from_state_req) {
- ret = -EINVAL;
- goto out;
- }
+ if (mem->state != from_state_req)
+ return -EINVAL;
if (to_state == MEM_OFFLINE)
mem->state = MEM_GOING_OFFLINE;
ret = memory_block_action(mem->start_section_nr, to_state, online_type);
-
if (ret) {
mem->state = from_state_req;
- goto out;
+ } else {
+ mem->state = to_state;
+ if (to_state == MEM_ONLINE)
+ mem->last_online = online_type;
Why do we need to remember last online type ?
And as far as I know, we can obtain which zone a page was in last time it
was onlined by check page->flags, just like online_pages() does. If we
use online_kernel or online_movable, the zone boundary will be
recalculated.
So we don't need to remember the last online type.
Seeing from your patch, I guess memory_subsys_online() can only handle
online and offline. So mem->last_online is used to remember what user has
done through the original way to trigger memory hot-remove, right ? And
when
user does it in this new way, it just does the same thing as user does last
time.
But I still think we don't need to remember it because if finally you call
online_pages(), it just does the same thing as last time by default.
online_pages()
{
......
if (online_type == ONLINE_KERNEL ......
if (online_type == ONLINE_MOVABLE......
zone = page_zone(pfn_to_page(pfn));
/* Here, the page will be put into the zone which it belong to last
time. */
......
}
I just thought of it. Maybe I missed something in your design. Please tell
me if I'm wrong.
Reviewed-by: Tang Chen <tangchen@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Thanks. :)
--
To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in
the body to majordomo@xxxxxxxxx. For more info on Linux MM,
see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ .
Don't email: <a href=mailto:"dont@xxxxxxxxx";> email@xxxxxxxxx </a>