On 1/21/21 3:27 PM, David Hildenbrand wrote: > On 18.01.21 14:21, Anshuman Khandual wrote: >> >> >> On 1/18/21 6:43 PM, Anshuman Khandual wrote: >>> From: David Hildenbrand <david@xxxxxxxxxx> >>> >>> Right now, we only check against MAX_PHYSMEM_BITS - but turns out there >>> are more restrictions of which memory we can actually hotplug, especially >>> om arm64 or s390x once we support them: we might receive something like >>> -E2BIG or -ERANGE from add_memory_driver_managed(), stopping device >>> operation. >>> >>> So, check right when initializing the device which memory we can add, >>> warning the user. Try only adding actually pluggable ranges: in the worst >>> case, no memory provided by our device is pluggable. >>> >>> In the usual case, we expect all device memory to be pluggable, and in >>> corner cases only some memory at the end of the device-managed memory >>> region to not be pluggable. >>> >>> Cc: "Michael S. Tsirkin" <mst@xxxxxxxxxx> >>> Cc: Jason Wang <jasowang@xxxxxxxxxx> >>> Cc: Pankaj Gupta <pankaj.gupta.linux@xxxxxxxxx> >>> Cc: Michal Hocko <mhocko@xxxxxxxxxx> >>> Cc: Oscar Salvador <osalvador@xxxxxxx> >>> Cc: Wei Yang <richard.weiyang@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> >>> Cc: Andrew Morton <akpm@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> >>> Cc: catalin.marinas@xxxxxxx >>> Cc: teawater <teawaterz@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> >>> Cc: Anshuman Khandual <anshuman.khandual@xxxxxxx> >>> Cc: Pankaj Gupta <pankaj.gupta@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> >>> Cc: Jonathan Cameron <Jonathan.Cameron@xxxxxxxxxx> >>> Cc: hca@xxxxxxxxxxxxx >>> Cc: Vasily Gorbik <gor@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> >>> Cc: Will Deacon <will@xxxxxxxxxx> >>> Cc: Ard Biesheuvel <ardb@xxxxxxxxxx> >>> Cc: Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@xxxxxxx> >>> Cc: Heiko Carstens <hca@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> >>> Cc: Michal Hocko <mhocko@xxxxxxxxxx> >>> Signed-off-by: David Hildenbrand <david@xxxxxxxxxx> >>> Signed-off-by: Anshuman Khandual <anshuman.khandual@xxxxxxx> >> >> Hello David, >> >> As your original patch was in the RFC state, I have just maintained >> the same here as well. But once you test this patch along with the >> new series, please do let me know if this needs to be converted to >> a normal PATCH instead. Thank you. > > Yes, you can drop the RFC part. I assume you'll send another revision, > I'll do another test there, thanks! Sure, will drop the RFC in next version.
