Hello Peter, On 10/10/2013 07:10 AM, H. Peter Anvin wrote: > On 10/09/2013 02:45 PM, Zhang Yanfei wrote: >>> >>> I would also argue that in the VM scenario -- and arguable even in the >>> hardware scenario -- the right thing is to not expose the flexible >>> memory in the e820/EFI tables, and instead have it hotadded (possibly >>> *immediately* so) on boot. This avoids both the boot time funnies as >>> well as the scaling issues with metadata. >>> >> >> So in this kind of scenario, hotpluggable memory will not be detected >> at boot time, and admin should not use this movable_node boot option >> and the kernel will act as before, using top-down allocation always. >> > > Yes. The idea is that the kernel will boot up without the hotplug > memory, but if desired, will immediately see a hotplug-add event for the > movable memory. Yeah, this is good. But in the scenario that boot with hotplug memory, we need the movable_node option. So as tejun has explained a lot about this patchset, do you still have objection to it or could I ask andrew to merge it into -mm tree for more tests? -- Thanks. Zhang Yanfei -- 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>