Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1754905AbcLBRkK (ORCPT ); Fri, 2 Dec 2016 12:40:10 -0500 Received: from mail-pg0-f44.google.com ([74.125.83.44]:33818 "EHLO mail-pg0-f44.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752672AbcLBRkJ (ORCPT ); Fri, 2 Dec 2016 12:40:09 -0500 Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 0/2] arm64: memory-hotplug: Add Memory Hotplug support To: Maciej Bielski , Will Deacon References: <1480637999-4320-1-git-send-email-scott.branden@broadcom.com> <18021c70-a4a0-3007-c861-82ede74f965e@virtualopensystems.com> <20161202104907.GB8266@arm.com> <99a1ce87-2dfc-f6f8-353b-70fcd0b3a977@virtualopensystems.com> Cc: Arnd Bergmann , Russell King , Catalin Marinas , Ard Biesheuvel , Mark Rutland , Xishi Qiu , BCM Kernel Feedback , Tang Chen , linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Andrea Reale2 , Kostas Katrinis , Christian Pinto From: Scott Branden Message-ID: <546cf066-6351-8357-2388-73420ec063ec@broadcom.com> Date: Fri, 2 Dec 2016 09:40:04 -0800 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:45.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/45.2.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <99a1ce87-2dfc-f6f8-353b-70fcd0b3a977@virtualopensystems.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252; 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: 973 Lines: 29 Hi Maciej, On 16-12-02 02:55 AM, Maciej Bielski wrote: > > > On 02/12/2016 11:49, Will Deacon wrote: >> On Fri, Dec 02, 2016 at 10:13:43AM +0100, Maciej Bielski wrote: >>> Recently we have announced our effort on that: >>> https://lkml.org/lkml/2016/11/17/49 >>> >>> For now we have a working solution for hotplug and we are performing >>> code cleanup to push the patches soon. >> Are these intended to replace or extend Scott's patches? If the former, >> please work with Scott's stuff as a base rather than posting a competing >> series. > In the piece of code provided by Scott I have seen similar steps to what > is done by us but our work went further since we have the mapping > created and everything is working via the sysfs interface. I am now > having closer look and comparing them. I would love to see the missing section mapping step and any other additions to test out. Please send additions as soon as you have a chance. Regards, Scott >> >> Will >