Re: [PATCH V5 - Rebased] mm/hotplug: Reorder memblock_[free|remove]() calls in try_remove_memory()

On 13.06.19 03:54, Andrew Morton wrote:

On Wed, 12 Jun 2019 08:53:33 +0200 David Hildenbrand [off-list ref] wrote:

quoted

quoted

quoted

quoted

...


- Rebased on linux-next (next-20190611)

Yet the patch you've prepared is designed for 5.3.  Was that
deliberate, or should we be targeting earlier kernels?

It was deliberate for 5.3 as a preparation for upcoming reworked arm64 hot-remove.

We should probably add to the patch description something like "This is
a preparation for arm64 memory hotremove. The described issue is not
relevant on other architectures."

Please.  And is there any reason to merge it separately?  Can it be
[patch 1/3] in the "arm64/mm: Enable memory hot remove" series?

Nothing that the patch can be considered a cleanup:

"
mm/hotplug: Reorder memblock_[free|remove]() calls in try_remove_memory()

In add_memory_resource() we have:

	memblock_add_node(start, size, nid)
	...
	arch_add_memory(nid, start, size, &restrictions);
	...
	create_memory_block_devices(start, size);

While in try_remove_memory() we have:

	memblock_free(start, size);
	memblock_remove(start, size);
	...
	remove_memory_block_devices(start, size);
	arch_remove_memory(nid, start, size, NULL);

Let's restore the correct order by removing the memblock after
arch_remove_memory().
"

I think with such a description, we can include it now. Andrew?

-- 

Thanks,

David / dhildenb

_______________________________________________
linux-arm-kernel mailing list
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel