I think it again, and found that this check is necessary. Because we only
lock memory hotplug when offlining pages. Here is the steps to offline and
remove memory:
1. lock memory hotplug
2. offline a memory section
3. unlock memory hotplug
4. repeat 1-3 to offline all memory sections
5.
is just optimization and does not fix any problem.
CC: David Rientjes rient...@google.com
CC: Jiang Liu liu...@gmail.com
CC: Len Brown len.br...@intel.com
CC: Christoph Lameter c...@linux.com
Cc: Minchan Kim minchan@gmail.com
CC: Andrew Morton a...@linux-foundation.org
CC: KOSAKI Motohiro
...@kernel.crashing.org
CC: Paul Mackerras pau...@samba.org
CC: Christoph Lameter c...@linux.com
Cc: Minchan Kim minchan@gmail.com
CC: Andrew Morton a...@linux-foundation.org
CC: KOSAKI Motohiro kosaki.motoh...@jp.fujitsu.com
CC: Wen Congyang we...@cn.fujitsu.com
Signed-off-by: Yasuaki
Known problems:
1. memory can't be offlined when CONFIG_MEMCG is selected.
For example: there is a memory device on node 1. The address range
is [1G, 1.5G). You will find 4 new directories memory8, memory9, memory10,
and memory11 under the directory /sys/devices/system/memory/.
need the check.
CC: David Rientjes rient...@google.com
CC: Jiang Liu liu...@gmail.com
CC: Len Brown len.br...@intel.com
CC: Christoph Lameter c...@linux.com
Cc: Minchan Kim minchan@gmail.com
CC: Andrew Morton a...@linux-foundation.org
CC: KOSAKI Motohiro kosaki.motoh...@jp.fujitsu.com
...@google.com
CC: Jiang Liu liu...@gmail.com
CC: Len Brown len.br...@intel.com
CC: Christoph Lameter c...@linux.com
Cc: Minchan Kim minchan@gmail.com
CC: Andrew Morton a...@linux-foundation.org
CC: KOSAKI Motohiro kosaki.motoh...@jp.fujitsu.com
Signed-off-by: Wen Congyang we...@cn.fujitsu.com
On Mon, Oct 1, 2012 at 8:34 PM, Ni zhan Chen nizhan.c...@gmail.com wrote:
On 09/05/2012 05:25 PM, we...@cn.fujitsu.com wrote:
From: Wen Congyang we...@cn.fujitsu.com
The function acpi_bus_remove() can remove a acpi device from acpi device.
IIUC, s/acpi device/acpi bus
IIUC,
Then, you introduced bisect breakage. It is definitely unacceptable.
What is bisect breakage meaning?
Think what's happen when only applying path [1/21].
___
Linuxppc-dev mailing list
Linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org
On Thu, Sep 27, 2012 at 11:50 PM, Yasuaki Ishimatsu
isimatu.yasu...@jp.fujitsu.com wrote:
Hi Chen,
2012/09/28 11:22, Ni zhan Chen wrote:
On 09/05/2012 05:25 PM, we...@cn.fujitsu.com wrote:
From: Yasuaki Ishimatsu isimatu.yasu...@jp.fujitsu.com
remove_memory() only try to offline pages.
...@intel.com
CC: Benjamin Herrenschmidt b...@kernel.crashing.org
CC: Paul Mackerras pau...@samba.org
CC: Christoph Lameter c...@linux.com
Cc: Minchan Kim minchan@gmail.com
CC: Andrew Morton a...@linux-foundation.org
CC: KOSAKI Motohiro kosaki.motoh...@jp.fujitsu.com
CC: Wen Congyang we
On Thu, Jun 28, 2012 at 1:06 AM, Yasuaki Ishimatsu
isimatu.yasu...@jp.fujitsu.com wrote:
Hi Wen,
2012/06/27 17:49, Wen Congyang wrote:
At 06/27/2012 01:44 PM, Yasuaki Ishimatsu Wrote:
When offline_pages() is called to offlined memory, the function fails since
all memory has been offlined. In
diff --git a/mm/memory.c b/mm/memory.c
index 1b7dc66..195d6e1 100644
--- a/mm/memory.c
+++ b/mm/memory.c
@@ -2447,7 +2447,8 @@ static inline int pte_unmap_same(struct mm_struct *mm,
pmd_t *pmd,
return same;
}
-static inline void cow_user_page(struct page *dst, struct page *src,
@@ -268,9 +269,9 @@ void __init cbe_regs_init(void)
thread-regs = map;
thread-cbe_id = cbe_id;
map-be_node = thread-be_node;
- cpu_set(i, cbe_local_mask[cbe_id]);
Adapt new API.
Almost change is trivial. Most important change is the below line
because we plan to change task-cpus_allowed implementation.
- ctx-cpus_allowed = current-cpus_allowed;
Signed-off-by: KOSAKI Motohiro kosaki.motoh...@jp.fujitsu.com
Cc: Benjamin Herrenschmidt b
)
ret = vma-vm_ops-access(vma, addr, buf,
Looks good to me.
Reviewed-by: KOSAKI Motohiro kosaki.motoh...@jp.fujitsu.com
___
Linuxppc-dev mailing list
Linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org
https://lists.ozlabs.org/listinfo/linuxppc-dev
, Ian Munsie wrote:
From: Ian Munsieimun...@au1.ibm.com
This patch converts numerous trivial compat syscalls through the generic
kernel code to use the COMPAT_SYSCALL_DEFINE family of macros.
Why? This just makes the code look uglier and the functions harder
to grep for.
I guess
On 02/09/2010 10:51 PM, Michael Neuling wrote:
I'd still like someone with a CONFIG_STACK_GROWSUP arch to test/ACK it
as well.
There's only one CONFIG_GROWSUP arch - parisc.
Could someone please test it on parisc?
I did.
How about doing:
'ulimit -s 15; ls'
before and after
.
Signed-off-by: Michael Neuling mi...@neuling.org
Cc: sta...@kernel.org
---
Attempts to answer comments from Kosaki Motohiro.
Tested on PPC only, hence !CONFIG_STACK_GROWSUP. Someone should
probably ACK for an arch with CONFIG_STACK_GROWSUP.
As noted, stable needs the same patch, but 2.6.32
Hi,
Why do we need page size independent stack size? It seems to have
compatibility breaking risk.
I don't think so. The current behaviour is clearly wrong, we dont need a
16x larger stack just because you went from a 4kB to a 64kB base page
size. The user application stack usage is
Hi
apkm, linus: this or something like it needs to go into 2.6.33 ( 32) to
fix 'ulimit -s'.
fix ulimit -s is too cool explanation ;-)
we are not ESPer. please consider to provide what bug is exist.
Mikey
[PATCH] Restrict stack space reservation to rlimit
When reserving stack space
Hi,
Why do we need page size independent stack size? It seems to have
compatibility breaking risk.
I don't think so. The current behaviour is clearly wrong, we dont need a
16x larger stack just because you went from a 4kB to a 64kB base page
size. The user
Hi,
I didn't discuss which behavior is better. Michael said he want to apply
his patch to 2.6.32 2.6.33. stable tree never accept the breaking
compatibility patch.
Your answer doesn't explain why can't we wait it until next merge window.
btw, personally, I like page size
Hi
sorry for late responce. my e-mail reading speed is very slow ;-)
First, Could you please read past thread?
I think many topic of this mail are already discussed.
On Thu, Jun 04, 2009 at 07:23:15PM +0900, KOSAKI Motohiro wrote:
Current linux policy is, zone_reclaim_mode is enabled
-compatibility.
Signed-off-by: KOSAKI Motohiro kosaki.motoh...@jp.fujitsu.com
Cc: Christoph Lameter c...@linux-foundation.org
Cc: Rik van Riel r...@redhat.com
Cc: Robin Holt h...@sgi.com
Cc: Zhang, Yanmin yanmin.zh...@intel.com
Cc: Wu Fengguang fengguang...@intel.com
Cc: linux-i...@vger.kernel.org
Cc
/vmallocinfo, I need
a _caller variant of it.
Signed-off-by: Benjamin Herrenschmidt b...@kernel.crashing.org
It seems reasonable reason and this patch looks good to me :)
Reviewed-by: KOSAKI Motohiro kosaki.motoh...@jp.fujitsu.com
I want to put into powerpc-next patches relying into that, so
On Wed, 11 Feb 2009 17:22:47 +0900 (JST)
KOSAKI Motohiro kosaki.motoh...@jp.fujitsu.com wrote:
I want to put into powerpc-next patches relying into that, so if the
patch is ok with you guys, can I stick it in powerpc.git ?
hm.
Generally, all MM patch should merge into -mm tree
26 matches
Mail list logo
