Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1751283Ab2KPBIk (ORCPT ); Thu, 15 Nov 2012 20:08:40 -0500 Received: from fgwmail5.fujitsu.co.jp ([192.51.44.35]:33923 "EHLO fgwmail5.fujitsu.co.jp" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751054Ab2KPBIh (ORCPT ); Thu, 15 Nov 2012 20:08:37 -0500 X-SecurityPolicyCheck: OK by SHieldMailChecker v1.7.4 Message-ID: <50A591E5.9080906@jp.fujitsu.com> Date: Fri, 16 Nov 2012 10:07:49 +0900 From: Yasuaki Ishimatsu User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 5.1; rv:16.0) Gecko/20121026 Thunderbird/16.0.2 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: "Rafael J. Wysocki" CC: Wen Congyang , , , , Len Brown , Andrew Morton , Lai Jiangshan , Jiang Liu , KOSAKI Motohiro , Minchan Kim , Mel Gorman , David Rientjes , Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk , Toshi Kani Subject: Re: [Patch v5 0/7] acpi,memory-hotplug: implement framework for hot removing memory References: <1352962777-24407-1-git-send-email-wency@cn.fujitsu.com> <9217155.1eDFuhkN55@vostro.rjw.lan> In-Reply-To: <9217155.1eDFuhkN55@vostro.rjw.lan> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 4286 Lines: 111 Hi Rafael, 2012/11/16 9:28, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote: > On Thursday, November 15, 2012 02:59:30 PM Wen Congyang wrote: >> The memory device can be removed by 2 ways: >> 1. send eject request by SCI >> 2. echo 1 >/sys/bus/pci/devices/PNP0C80:XX/eject >> >> In the 1st case, acpi_memory_disable_device() will be called. >> In the 2nd case, acpi_memory_device_remove() will be called. >> acpi_memory_device_remove() will also be called when we unbind the >> memory device from the driver acpi_memhotplug or a driver initialization >> fails. >> >> acpi_memory_disable_device() has already implemented a code which >> offlines memory and releases acpi_memory_info struct . But >> acpi_memory_device_remove() has not implemented it yet. >> >> So the patch prepares the framework for hot removing memory and >> adds the framework into acpi_memory_device_remove(). >> >> We may hotremove the memory device by this 2 ways at the same time. >> So we remove the function acpi_memory_disable_device(), and use >> acpi_bus_hot_remove_device() which is used by 2nd case to implement it. >> We lock device in acpi_bus_hot_remove_device(), so there is no >> need to add lock in acpi_memhotplug. >> >> The last version of this patchset is here: >> https://lkml.org/lkml/2012/11/8/121 >> >> Note: >> 1. The following commit in pm tree can be dropped now(The other two patches >> are already dropped): >> 54c4c7db6cb94d7d1217df6d7fca6847c61744ab >> 2. This patchset requires the following patch(It is in pm tree now) >> https://lkml.org/lkml/2012/11/1/225 >> >> Changes from v4 to v5: >> 1. patch2: new patch. use acpi_bus_hot_remove_device() to implement memory >> device hotremove. >> >> Changes from v3 to v4: >> 1. patch1: unlock list_lock when removing memory fails. >> 2. patch2: just rebase them >> 3. patch3-7: these patches are in -mm tree, and they conflict with this >> patchset, so Adrew Morton drop them from -mm tree. I rebase and merge >> them into this patchset. >> >> Wen Congyang (6): >> acpi,memory-hotplug: deal with eject request in hotplug queue >> acpi_memhotplug.c: fix memory leak when memory device is unbound from >> the module acpi_memhotplug >> acpi_memhotplug.c: free memory device if acpi_memory_enable_device() >> failed >> acpi_memhotplug.c: don't allow to eject the memory device if it is >> being used >> acpi_memhotplug.c: bind the memory device when the driver is being >> loaded >> acpi_memhotplug.c: auto bind the memory device which is hotplugged >> before the driver is loaded >> >> Yasuaki Ishimatsu (1): >> acpi,memory-hotplug : add memory offline code to >> acpi_memory_device_remove() > > Well, I have tried _really_ hard to apply this patchset, but pretty much > none of the patches except for [1/7] applied for me. I have no idea what > tree they are against, but I'm pretty sure it's not my tree. > > I _have_ applied patches [1-4/7] and pushed them to linux-pm.git/linux-next. I checked your tree and found a mistake. You merged a following patch into your tree. commitid:2ba281f1 ACPI / memory-hotplug: introduce a mutex lock to protect the list in acpi_memory_device But it is wrong. [1/7] patch is "acpi,memory-hotplug : add memory offline code to acpi_memory_device_remove()". So we would like you to merge it instead of commitid:2ba281f1. Thanks, Yasuaki Ishimatsu > I needed to fix up almost all of them so that they applied, so please check > if my fixups make sense (and let me know ASAP if that's not the case). > > If they are OK, please rebase the rest of the series on top of > linux-pm.git/linux-next and repost. I'm not going to take any more > patches that don't apply from you. > > Moreover, I'm not going to take any more ACPI memory hotplug patches > for v3.8 except for the [5-7/7] from this series (after they have been > rebased and _if_ they apply), so please don't submit any until the v3.8 > merge window closes (of course, you're free to post RFCs, but I will > ignore them). > > Thanks, > Rafael > > -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/