From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.6 required=3.0 tests=DKIMWL_WL_HIGH,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS, USER_AGENT_SANE_1 autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 68C48C06511 for ; Mon, 1 Jul 2019 10:28:01 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 41235206A3 for ; Mon, 1 Jul 2019 10:28:01 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=kernel.org; s=default; t=1561976881; bh=gU3i2HN7BDKCqPe6ZX+sM5LZN8f4LmC0eKgd8bSILjg=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:References:In-Reply-To:List-ID:From; b=i327BynSWHBnKkDYZ5SYR6pVjYAb5dvoq6F7xHiPPKJAU6KBzcY7vU02alsyOISGU ij0ngWy4hCgzHvFdRJKMx/8l5x/5rbMGeDhKk+aouGUZwCEXWkg07vCshVVFE+iUYC aKqxV4mp7D4pTWEzmH1rgvQJFUfyDBmxvXnjBdvk= Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1728897AbfGAK2A (ORCPT ); Mon, 1 Jul 2019 06:28:00 -0400 Received: from mx2.suse.de ([195.135.220.15]:37858 "EHLO mx1.suse.de" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-FAIL) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1726076AbfGAK17 (ORCPT ); Mon, 1 Jul 2019 06:27:59 -0400 X-Virus-Scanned: by amavisd-new at test-mx.suse.de Received: from relay2.suse.de (unknown [195.135.220.254]) by mx1.suse.de (Postfix) with ESMTP id EE62EAF32; Mon, 1 Jul 2019 10:27:57 +0000 (UTC) Date: Mon, 1 Jul 2019 12:27:56 +0200 From: Michal Hocko To: Oscar Salvador Cc: David Hildenbrand , linux-mm@kvack.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-ia64@vger.kernel.org, linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org, linux-s390@vger.kernel.org, linux-sh@vger.kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, akpm@linux-foundation.org, Dan Williams , Wei Yang , Igor Mammedov , Greg Kroah-Hartman , "Rafael J. Wysocki" , Alex Deucher , "David S. Miller" , Mark Brown , Chris Wilson , Jonathan Cameron Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 10/11] mm/memory_hotplug: Make unregister_memory_block_under_nodes() never fail Message-ID: <20190701102756.GO6376@dhcp22.suse.cz> References: <20190527111152.16324-1-david@redhat.com> <20190527111152.16324-11-david@redhat.com> <20190701085144.GJ6376@dhcp22.suse.cz> <20190701093640.GA17349@linux> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20190701093640.GA17349@linux> User-Agent: Mutt/1.10.1 (2018-07-13) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Mon 01-07-19 11:36:44, Oscar Salvador wrote: > On Mon, Jul 01, 2019 at 10:51:44AM +0200, Michal Hocko wrote: > > Yeah, we do not allow to offline multi zone (node) ranges so the current > > code seems to be over engineered. > > > > Anyway, I am wondering why do we have to strictly check for already > > removed nodes links. Is the sysfs code going to complain we we try to > > remove again? > > No, sysfs will silently "fail" if the symlink has already been removed. > At least that is what I saw last time I played with it. > > I guess the question is what if sysfs handling changes in the future > and starts dropping warnings when trying to remove a symlink is not there. > Maybe that is unlikely to happen? And maybe we handle it then rather than have a static allocation that everybody with hotremove configured has to pay for. -- Michal Hocko SUSE Labs