On Fri, 2 Oct 2009 13:44:58 -0500
Robert Jennings r...@linux.vnet.ibm.com wrote:
Memory balloon drivers can allocate a large amount of memory which
is not movable but could be freed to accomodate memory hotplug remove.
Prior to calling the memory hotplug notifier chain the memory in the
value.
Signed-off-by: KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Index: linux-2.6.25-rc2/block/cfq-iosched.c
===
--- linux-2.6.25-rc2.orig/block/cfq-iosched.c
+++ linux-2.6.25-rc2/block/cfq-iosched.c
@@ -1171,7 +1171,11 @@ call_for_each_cic
On Tue, 19 Feb 2008 09:36:34 +0100
Jens Axboe [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Tue, Feb 19 2008, KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki wrote:
On Sun, 17 Feb 2008 20:29:13 +0100
Jens Axboe [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
It's odd stuff. Could you perhaps try and add some printks to
block/cfq
On Tue, 19 Feb 2008 09:58:38 +0100
Jens Axboe [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
when I inserted printk here
==
for (i = 0; i nr; i++)
func(ioc, cics[i]);
printk(%d %lx\n, nr, index);
==
index was always 1 and nr was always 32.
So, cics[31]-key was always NULL when
On Tue, 19 Feb 2008 09:36:34 +0100
Jens Axboe [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Tue, Feb 19 2008, KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki wrote:
On Sun, 17 Feb 2008 20:29:13 +0100
Jens Axboe [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
It's odd stuff. Could you perhaps try and add some printks to
block/cfq
On Tue, 02 Oct 2007 16:10:53 -0700
Badari Pulavarty [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Otherwise, we need to add arch-specific hooks in hotplug-remove
code to be able to do this.
Isn't it just a matter of abstracting the test for a valid range of
memory? If it's really hard to abstract that,
On Wed, 03 Oct 2007 08:35:35 -0700
Badari Pulavarty [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Wed, 2007-10-03 at 10:19 +0900, KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki wrote:
CONFIG_ARCH_HAS_VALID_MEMORY_RANGE. Then define own
find_next_system_ram() (rename to is_valid_memory_range()) - which
checks the given range is a valid
On Wed, 31 Oct 2007 14:28:46 +0900
KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
ioresource was good structure for remembering which memory is conventional
memory and i386/x86_64/ia64 registered conventional memory as System RAM,
when I posted patch. (just say System Ram is not for memory hotplug
On Wed, 31 Oct 2007 08:02:40 -0800
Badari Pulavarty [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Paul's concern is, since we didn't need it so far - why we need this
for hotplug memory remove to work ? It might break API for *unknown*
applications. Its unfortunate that, hotplug memory add updates
/proc/iomem. We
On Wed, 31 Oct 2007 14:55:03 -0700
Dave Hansen [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Wed, 2007-10-31 at 14:11 -0800, Badari Pulavarty wrote:
Well, We don't need arch-specific remove_memory() for ia64 and ppc64.
x86_64, I don't know. We will know, only when some one does the
verification. I don't
in a new operation.
2byte cmpxchg/xchg is not available on some archs. This patch replaces
cmpxchg/xchg with operations under lock.
Signed-off-by: KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki kamezawa.hir...@jp.fujitsu.com
---
mm/page_cgroup.c | 20
1 file changed, 16 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
Index
On Thu, 10 Jun 2010 22:00:57 +0200
Maciej Rutecki maciej.rute...@gmail.com wrote:
I created a Bugzilla entry at
https://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=16178
for your bug report, please add your address to the CC list in there, thanks!
Hmm... It seems a panic in SLUB or SLAB.
Is
plz cc linux-mm in the next time...
And please incudes updates for Documentation/memory-hotplug.txt.
On Mon, 12 Jul 2010 10:42:06 -0500
Nathan Fontenot nf...@austin.ibm.com wrote:
This patch splits the memory_block struct into a memory_block
struct to cover each sysfs directory and a new
On Mon, 12 Jul 2010 10:44:10 -0500
Nathan Fontenot nf...@austin.ibm.com wrote:
This patch moves the register/unregister_memory routines to
avoid a forward declaration. It also moves the sysfs file
creation and deletion for each directory into the register/
unregister routines to avoid
On Mon, 12 Jul 2010 10:45:25 -0500
Nathan Fontenot nf...@austin.ibm.com wrote:
This patch introduces the new 'split' file in each memory sysfs
directory and the associated routines needed to handle splitting
a directory.
Signed-off-by; Nathan Fontenot nf...@austin.ibm.com
---
pleae check
On Tue, 13 Jul 2010 10:51:58 -0500
Nathan Fontenot nf...@austin.ibm.com wrote:
And for what purpose this interface is ? Does this split memory block into
2 pieces
of the same size ?? sounds __very__ strange interface to me.
Yes, this splits the memory_block into two blocks of the
On Tue, 13 Jul 2010 22:18:03 -0500
Nathan Fontenot nf...@austin.ibm.com wrote:
On 07/13/2010 07:35 PM, KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki wrote:
On Tue, 13 Jul 2010 10:51:58 -0500
Nathan Fontenot nf...@austin.ibm.com wrote:
And for what purpose this interface is ? Does this split memory block
On Wed, 14 Jul 2010 12:25:03 +0900
KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki kamezawa.hir...@jp.fujitsu.com wrote:
On Tue, 13 Jul 2010 22:18:03 -0500
Nathan Fontenot nf...@austin.ibm.com wrote:
On 07/13/2010 07:35 PM, KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki wrote:
On Tue, 13 Jul 2010 10:51:58 -0500
Nathan Fontenot nf
On Thu, 15 Jul 2010 13:37:51 -0500
Nathan Fontenot nf...@austin.ibm.com wrote:
Split the memory_block struct into a memory_block
struct to cover each sysfs directory and a new memory_block_section
struct for each memory section covered by the sysfs directory.
This change allows for creation
On Thu, 15 Jul 2010 13:38:52 -0500
Nathan Fontenot nf...@austin.ibm.com wrote:
Add a new 'end_phys_index' file to each memory sysfs directory to
report the physical index of the last memory section
covered by the sysfs directory.
Signed-off-by: Nathan Fontenot nf...@austin.ibm.com
Does
On Thu, 15 Jul 2010 13:40:40 -0500
Nathan Fontenot nf...@austin.ibm.com wrote:
Update the node sysfs directory routines that create
links to the memory sysfs directories under each node.
This update makes the node code aware that a memory sysfs
directory can cover multiple memory sections.
On Mon, 19 Jul 2010 22:51:42 -0500
Nathan Fontenot nf...@austin.ibm.com wrote:
Move the find_me mory_block() routine up to avoid needing a forward
declaration in subsequent patches.
Signed-off-by: Nathan Fontenot nf...@austin.ibm.com
Acked-by: KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki kamezawa.hir
On Mon, 19 Jul 2010 22:52:50 -0500
Nathan Fontenot nf...@austin.ibm.com wrote:
Update the 'phys_index' properties of a memory block to include a
'start_phys_index' which is the same as the current 'phys_index' property.
This also adds an 'end_phys_index' property to indicate the id of the
On Mon, 19 Jul 2010 22:53:58 -0500
Nathan Fontenot nf...@austin.ibm.com wrote:
Add a section count property to the memory_block struct to track the number
of memory sections that have been added/removed from a emory block.
Signed-off-by: Nathan Fontenot nf...@asutin.ibm.com
---
On Mon, 19 Jul 2010 22:55:08 -0500
Nathan Fontenot nf...@austin.ibm.com wrote:
Update the memory sysfs code that each sysfs memory directory is now
considered a memory block that can contain multiple memory sections per
memory block. The default size of each memory block is SECTION_SIZE_BITS
On Mon, 19 Jul 2010 22:56:16 -0500
Nathan Fontenot nf...@austin.ibm.com wrote:
Update the find_memory_block declaration to to take a struct mem_section *
so that it matches the definition.
Signed-off-by: Nathan Fontenot nf...@austin.ibm.com
Reviewd-by: KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki kamezawa.hir
memory
section of the memory block to unregister.
Signed-off-by: Nathan Fontenot nf...@austin.ibm.com
Acked-by: KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki kamezawa.hir...@jp.fujitsu.com
___
Linuxppc-dev mailing list
Linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org
https://lists.ozlabs.org
On Tue, 03 Aug 2010 08:36:39 -0500
Nathan Fontenot nf...@austin.ibm.com wrote:
Move the find_memory_block() routine up to avoid needing a forward
declaration in subsequent patches.
Signed-off-by: Nathan Fontenot nf...@austin.ibm.com
Acked-by: KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki kamezawa.hir...@jp.fujitsu.com
struct name is updated to indicate the start and end values.
This also adds an 'end_phys_index' property to indicate the id of the
last section in th memory block.
Signed-off-by: Nathan Fontenot nf...@austin.ibm.com
Acked-by: KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki kamezawa.hir...@jp.fujitsu.com
nitpick. After
has been
removed so we can remove the memory block.
Signed-off-by: Nathan Fontenot nf...@austin.ibm.com
Acked-by: KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki kamezawa.hir...@jp.fujitsu.com
___
Linuxppc-dev mailing list
Linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org
https://lists.ozlabs.org
Fontenot nf...@austin.ibm.com
Acked-by: KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki kamezawa.hir...@jp.fujitsu.com
But a nitpick (see below)
---
drivers/base/memory.c |9 +
1 file changed, 9 insertions(+)
Index: linux-2.6/drivers/base/memory.c
-by: Nathan Fontenot nf...@austin.ibm.com
Acked-by: KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki kamezawa.hir...@jp.fujitsu.com
(But maybe it's better to get ppc guy's Ack.)
___
Linuxppc-dev mailing list
Linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org
https://lists.ozlabs.org/listinfo/linuxppc-dev
On Tue, 03 Aug 2010 08:41:45 -0500
Nathan Fontenot nf...@austin.ibm.com wrote:
Update the find_memory_block declaration to to take a struct mem_section *
so that it matches the definition.
Signed-off-by: Nathan Fontenot nf...@austin.ibm.com
Acked-by: KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki kamezawa.hir
memory
section of the memory block to unregister.
Signed-off-by: Nathan Fontenot nf...@austin.ibm.com
Acked-by: KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki kamezawa.hir...@jp.fujitsu.com
___
Linuxppc-dev mailing list
Linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org
https://lists.ozlabs.org
On Tue, 03 Aug 2010 08:44:16 -0500
Nathan Fontenot nf...@austin.ibm.com wrote:
Update the memory hotplug documentation to reflect the new behaviors of
memory blocks reflected in sysfs.
Signed-off-by: Nathan Fontenot nf...@austin.ibm.com
Acked-by: KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki kamezawa.hir
has been
removed so we can remove the memory block.
Signed-off-by: Nathan Fontenot nf...@austin.ibm.com
Reviewed-by: KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki kamezawa.hir...@jp.fujitsu.com
a nitpick,
Index: linux-next/include/linux/memory.h
be commented in code before MEMORY_BLOCK_SIZE declaration.
Signed-off-by: Nathan Fontenot nf...@austin.ibm.com
Reviewed-by: KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki kamezawa.hir...@jp.fujitsu.com
___
Linuxppc-dev mailing list
Linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org
https
...@austin.ibm.com
Reviewed-by: KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki kamezawa.hir...@jp.fujitsu.com
___
Linuxppc-dev mailing list
Linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org
https://lists.ozlabs.org/listinfo/linuxppc-dev
an additional
parameter to unregister_mem_sect_under_nodes so that we know which memory
section of the memory block to unregister.
Signed-off-by: Nathan Fontenot nf...@austin.ibm.com
Reviewed-by: KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki kamezawa.hir...@jp.fujitsu.com
___
Linuxppc
On Fri, 01 Oct 2010 13:37:49 -0500
Nathan Fontenot nf...@austin.ibm.com wrote:
Update the memory hotplug documentation to reflect the new behaviors of
memory blocks reflected in sysfs.
Signed-off-by: Nathan Fontenot nf...@austin.ibm.com
Reviewed-by: KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki kamezawa.hir
On Fri, 01 Oct 2010 13:28:39 -0500
Nathan Fontenot nf...@austin.ibm.com wrote:
Move the find_memory_block() routine up to avoid needing a forward
declaration in subsequent patches.
Signed-off-by: Nathan Fontenot nf...@austin.ibm.com
Reviewd-by: KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki kamezawa.hir
Fontenot nf...@austin.ibm.com
Reviewed-By: KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki kamezawa.hir...@jp.fujitsu.com
___
Linuxppc-dev mailing list
Linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org
https://lists.ozlabs.org/listinfo/linuxppc-dev
.
Sorry, here is a fix I posted today. but no ack yet.
==
From 507cc95c5ba2351bff16c5421255d1395a3b555b Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki kamezawa.hir...@jp.fujitsu.com
Date: Thu, 16 Jun 2011 17:28:07 +0900
Subject: [PATCH] Fix node_start/end_pfn() definition for mm/page_cgroup.c
On Tue, 26 Oct 2010 16:03:56 +0530
Subrata Modak subr...@linux.vnet.ibm.com wrote:
If you run LTP Memory CGROUP Controller functional test on
linux-2.6.36-git7, the following Backtrace, OOMKill rcu_sched_state
detected stall jiffies are created. The machine is not reachable
thereafter. Ways
this is good.
Reviewed-by: KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki kamezawa.hir...@jp.fujitsu.com
___
Linuxppc-dev mailing list
Linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org
https://lists.ozlabs.org/listinfo/linuxppc-dev
Signed-off-by: Yasuaki Ishimatsu isimatu.yasu...@jp.fujitsu.com
Acked-by: KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki kamezawa.hir...@jp.fujitsu.com
a nitpick below.
---
drivers/base/memory.c |6 +
include/linux/memory_hotplug.h |1 +
mm/memory_hotplug.c| 47
(2012/12/24 21:09), Tang Chen wrote:
From: Wen Congyang we...@cn.fujitsu.com
offlining memory blocks and checking whether memory blocks are offlined
are very similar. This patch introduces a new function to remove
redundant codes.
Signed-off-by: Wen Congyang we...@cn.fujitsu.com
---
(2012/12/24 21:09), Tang Chen wrote:
From: Yasuaki Ishimatsu isimatu.yasu...@jp.fujitsu.com
When (hot)adding memory into system, /sys/firmware/memmap/X/{end, start, type}
sysfs files are created. But there is no code to remove these files. The patch
implements the function to remove them.
() for some archtecuture is not implemented
(I don't know how to implement it for s390).
Signed-off-by: Wen Congyang we...@cn.fujitsu.com
Then, remove code will be symetric to add codes.
Acked-by: KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki kamezawa.hir...@jp.fujitsu.com
(2012/12/24 21:09), Tang Chen wrote:
From: Wen Congyang we...@cn.fujitsu.com
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
in your log and BUGFIX or -fix- in patch title
will be appreciated, I think.
Acked-by: KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki kamezawa.hir...@jp.fujitsu.com
___
Linuxppc-dev mailing list
Linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org
https://lists.ozlabs.org/listinfo/linuxppc-dev
(2012/12/24 21:09), Tang Chen wrote:
From: Wen Congyang we...@cn.fujitsu.com
We call hotadd_new_pgdat() to allocate memory to store node_data. So we
should free it when removing a node.
Signed-off-by: Wen Congyang we...@cn.fujitsu.com
I'm sorry but is it safe to remove pgdat ? All zone
(2012/12/27 21:16), Wen Congyang wrote:
At 12/26/2012 11:55 AM, Kamezawa Hiroyuki Wrote:
(2012/12/24 21:09), Tang Chen wrote:
From: Wen Congyang we...@cn.fujitsu.com
We call hotadd_new_pgdat() to allocate memory to store node_data. So we
should free it when removing a node.
Signed-off
(2012/12/30 15:02), Wen Congyang wrote:
At 12/28/2012 08:28 AM, Kamezawa Hiroyuki Wrote:
(2012/12/27 21:16), Wen Congyang wrote:
At 12/26/2012 11:55 AM, Kamezawa Hiroyuki Wrote:
(2012/12/24 21:09), Tang Chen wrote:
From: Wen Congyang we...@cn.fujitsu.com
We call hotadd_new_pgdat
(2013/01/10 16:14), Glauber Costa wrote:
On 01/10/2013 06:17 AM, Tang Chen wrote:
Note: if the memory provided by the memory device is used by the
kernel, it
can't be offlined. It is not a bug.
Right. But how often does this happen in testing? In other words,
please provide an overall
(2013/01/10 16:55), Glauber Costa wrote:
On 01/10/2013 11:31 AM, Kamezawa Hiroyuki wrote:
(2013/01/10 16:14), Glauber Costa wrote:
On 01/10/2013 06:17 AM, Tang Chen wrote:
Note: if the memory provided by the memory device is used by the
kernel, it
can't be offlined. It is not a bug.
Right
(2013/01/10 17:36), Glauber Costa wrote:
BTW, shrink_slab() is now node/zone aware ? If not, fixing that first will
be better direction I guess.
It is not upstream, but there are patches for this that I am already
using in my private tree.
Oh, I see. If it's merged, it's worth add
57 matches
Mail list logo
