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=-1.1 required=3.0 tests=DKIMWL_WL_HIGH,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS 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 D10AAC3815B for ; Wed, 15 Apr 2020 10:24:08 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B352C2078A for ; Wed, 15 Apr 2020 10:24:08 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=kernel.org; s=default; t=1586946248; bh=8UTd5VNRLgk5L67MAXg3c/cWS2UHVrkt6dCbxr/ugzI=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:References:In-Reply-To:List-ID:From; b=kYs2+tU+SyValOXMGUby15SNgnTt51glyzwYOlwl/sccN1u50I200bE39AR3q5Opc 6s9a72RWkJPAdrh/+NQ9R8MC3EF2uhDjgFf+S5wb+I7PaNNlQBXZn6ul22kQY60dW2 Zj+GnS4Kth5YfQ/vIFlD50PCDrHoHcFZbCLynKA4= Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S2896473AbgDOKW4 (ORCPT ); Wed, 15 Apr 2020 06:22:56 -0400 Received: from mail-wm1-f66.google.com ([209.85.128.66]:33651 "EHLO mail-wm1-f66.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S2896400AbgDOKQX (ORCPT ); Wed, 15 Apr 2020 06:16:23 -0400 Received: by mail-wm1-f66.google.com with SMTP id v8so14574028wma.0 for ; Wed, 15 Apr 2020 03:16:21 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:references :mime-version:content-disposition:in-reply-to; bh=6RF4WufMmMDOeU7tEnVUbEzApfb4RzYUUgBLy7xNXoc=; b=atK5g23fPaKzTeFIhsxxRawXT3tm5i1WNpt3Fg6OCKZf/ZdtvuyaFA6sF606aW1wmR 7PcYXEVu6AYZSmVBQTN/TNcqAG/PDS6cL/gQrWWdjLrJrzlZT11CvuhDcnIFOofVgF6a I6wWLwjZuEAyAVVPZSwN+JkK8AsvZVPpCuSr0YpGlaZZjGd1ubJy1GVhg8BvE0tYmwo/ EIcf3UoobCZ64BaI4l7WyLM4azlGgKm8fUnzmyGqX/MNnL6Vth9tljSLutENLORAtkA3 isXOCuEI6tcFbxfFFuy2TllW5ZV9c6DlX37pFGXO2Yo02JsTkQZcbST43ZxzLApF5i/m vkGQ== X-Gm-Message-State: AGi0PuY/3gJvnltPR9eXsPS/Zwn+G49xHxQnn0+DAtLewUDF/7dKgo5b 2Ddb1SePtSo6Vf/tN5JQ0Lo= X-Google-Smtp-Source: APiQypKwwZOSZo6TKJ0VX0uh/VRxb42E0lr4O+D1OO7/WfRpILKWx7YwVM17KF5oioj4FCitYR+BbA== X-Received: by 2002:a1c:5ac4:: with SMTP id o187mr4704758wmb.79.1586945781247; Wed, 15 Apr 2020 03:16:21 -0700 (PDT) Received: from localhost (ip-37-188-180-223.eurotel.cz. [37.188.180.223]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id h137sm17223451wme.0.2020.04.15.03.16.19 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256/256); Wed, 15 Apr 2020 03:16:20 -0700 (PDT) Date: Wed, 15 Apr 2020 12:16:18 +0200 From: Michal Hocko To: David Hildenbrand Cc: Anshuman Khandual , linux-mm@kvack.org, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, akpm@linux-foundation.org, catalin.marinas@arm.com, mark.rutland@arm.com, Dan Williams , Yu Zhao , Hsin-Yi Wang , Thomas Gleixner , Steve Capper , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/2] arm64/hotplug: Process MEM_OFFLINE and MEM_CANCEL_OFFLINE events Message-ID: <20200415101618.GD4629@dhcp22.suse.cz> References: <1586932784-16315-1-git-send-email-anshuman.khandual@arm.com> <31ce355b-abf7-ac3b-a5b4-ae1b0a52fb3c@redhat.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <31ce355b-abf7-ac3b-a5b4-ae1b0a52fb3c@redhat.com> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Wed 15-04-20 09:35:33, David Hildenbrand wrote: > On 15.04.20 08:39, Anshuman Khandual wrote: > > This series improves arm64 memory event notifier (hot remove) robustness by > > enabling it to detect potential problems (if any) in the future. But first > > it enumerates memory isolation failure reasons that can be sent across a > > notifier. This series does not go beyond arm64 to explore if these failure > > reason codes could be used in other existing registered memory notifiers. > > Please do let me know if there is any other potential use cases, will be > > happy to incorporate next time around. Also should we add similar failure > > reasons for online_pages() as well ? > > > > This series has been tested on arm64, boot tested on x86 and build tested > > on multiple other platforms. > > > > I'm sorry, but I have to nack this series. Why? > > 1. A hotplug notifier should not have to bother why offlining failed. He > received a MEM_GOING_OFFLINE, followed by a MEM_CANCEL_OFFLINE. That's > all he really has to know. Undo what you've done, end of story. > > 2. Patch 2 just introduces dead code that should never happen unless > something is horribly broken in the core (memory offlined although > nacked from notifier). And, it (for *whatever reason*) thinks it's okay > to bail out if another noYtifier canceled offlining hotplugged memory. > > I fail to see the benefit for core changes and Agreed! If arm64 wants to check and report early bootmem memory offlining then just do it. There is no reason to add a whole machinery for that. Cancel notifier is indeed only supposed to restore the state before GOING_OFFLINE. > 4 files changed, 99 insertions(+), 13 deletions(-) -- Michal Hocko SUSE Labs