From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from canpmsgout07.his.huawei.com (canpmsgout07.his.huawei.com [113.46.200.222]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id F0FE2329E5D; Thu, 6 Aug 2026 03:30:16 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=113.46.200.222 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1785987021; cv=none; b=pVojs5U8/7zkadd3EUsvf1ELndj7iSsfCd6/tARrabbPqXwu8WB2ah9plU4Tm9m5gOHiKwqNX90CyRtO/N+OmPIU9AsI8mDRy8DWaW29sflpKcaWkaiOc4W4PZByYLR520pqLuB4nZyETISeuLAQfdAeXXSxj2C0Spo258afYw0= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1785987021; c=relaxed/simple; bh=5wus9n0+Mpv7rQWIuIFpoGHkgxM6w2e5wGqel/1cJaU=; h=Message-ID:Date:MIME-Version:Subject:To:CC:References:From: In-Reply-To:Content-Type; b=ky2L2dbAUfgHUcHtbUiToTlod9U4B2JjNeaoUCO1MH3c+LyLCHX6J2NNK5bViz2Oy3Flv99IrX2KyicdmgV3Epna5mGsEBK62GXJkPFRK2DK5GiBnVMc4lPPWPTh36N/TZ273I0opiAUY2CLYChmOPWhOpY5GUuyAqgOzNlvv4c= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=quarantine dis=none) header.from=huawei.com; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=huawei.com; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=huawei.com header.i=@huawei.com header.b=xvnedJmH; arc=none smtp.client-ip=113.46.200.222 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=quarantine dis=none) header.from=huawei.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=huawei.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=huawei.com header.i=@huawei.com header.b="xvnedJmH" dkim-signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=huawei.com; s=dkim; c=relaxed/relaxed; q=dns/txt; h=From; bh=5wus9n0+Mpv7rQWIuIFpoGHkgxM6w2e5wGqel/1cJaU=; b=xvnedJmHWhePXoOFObXkvLZJh87bx4MqXErY79eOEcbrJjXMeD32rgcW+e1+Mzp80DMGfqr0p H5FXDNNf1FtCAkZtvN0zOyEW3ZqTIIFL63xHsatM7LYQOmJbAX0l/KDbPYMgxr2Fhy00WgHcfHo 1HBeTwRYcVunCQ6fWo8o/vc= Received: from mail.maildlp.com (unknown [172.19.162.92]) by canpmsgout07.his.huawei.com (SkyGuard) with ESMTPS id 4hFsx51ybgzLlTg; Thu, 6 Aug 2026 11:20:41 +0800 (CST) Received: from kwepemo500018.china.huawei.com (unknown [7.202.195.199]) by mail.maildlp.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 14F5F4058A; Thu, 6 Aug 2026 11:30:13 +0800 (CST) Received: from [10.174.176.101] (10.174.176.101) by kwepemo500018.china.huawei.com (7.202.195.199) with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_GCM_SHA384) id 15.2.2562.45; Thu, 6 Aug 2026 11:30:09 +0800 Message-ID: <6840c720-8cb7-46bb-a652-040c130a4427@huawei.com> Date: Thu, 6 Aug 2026 11:30:08 +0800 Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird Subject: Re: [PATCH v5 25/36] mm/memory_hotplug: support N_MEMORY_PRIVATE node hotplug To: Gregory Price , CC: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , References: <20260720193431.3841992-1-gourry@gourry.net> <20260720193431.3841992-26-gourry@gourry.net> From: Qiqi Li In-Reply-To: <20260720193431.3841992-26-gourry@gourry.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-ClientProxiedBy: kwepems100002.china.huawei.com (7.221.188.206) To kwepemo500018.china.huawei.com (7.202.195.199) Hi Gregory, On 7/21/2026 3:34 AM, Gregory Price wrote: > Add add_private_memory_driver_managed() to let modules hotplug > memory onto an N_MEMORY_PRIVATE node they control. I am trying to understand how the nid passed to add_private_memory_driver_managed() is expected to be provisioned. >From what I can see, both node_private_register() and __add_memory_resource() require the nid to already be present in node_possible_map. My understanding is therefore that this patch supports hotplugging private memory onto an existing possible node, rather than creating a new possible node ID at runtime. For example, in the use case I am looking at, the device's private node is not described by firmware. Would its nid need to be reserved during early NUMA initialization, or is there another mechanism that I may have missed? Also, could you please Cc me on future revisions of this series? I would appreciate it and would be happy to follow the work:) Thanks, Qiqi