Received: by 2002:a05:6a10:7420:0:0:0:0 with SMTP id hk32csp243847pxb; Thu, 17 Feb 2022 03:11:38 -0800 (PST) X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJzUjLYwlAui3kL2ookpgvuZ4WpQ13r3AccyNutVPT8gwLuw2KKRXXCoAtuk+adl+l9Q6fD4 X-Received: by 2002:a65:6751:0:b0:363:43a5:c7e3 with SMTP id c17-20020a656751000000b0036343a5c7e3mr2042367pgu.46.1645096298094; Thu, 17 Feb 2022 03:11:38 -0800 (PST) ARC-Seal: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; t=1645096298; cv=none; d=google.com; s=arc-20160816; b=SKCg/oeh0LzuGBMUQ7qgsG8z6pqh+dBmL/jPB1HgcCxqeDsjZRhkNtv4iQuN1tkHF3 eS3isW+pFIAKjAUo7B6PoSRAQNwRvpzggy18TWaJO7b2gbJQx9g6WDMZMuoxWAQJWe8k C7ekJjWAYr4ZTeN8b4Aj70p8wLuRdzkjPdgTSHSM0Anxu1I2zVFFpnTCBVsSLG5UpAba aXGjbcxkgzIS7HGSDg9jZZswo3ejaYLjiaheGZvxqeG3qAH3csy219ISZ0fd4TBGMszQ +2kE4HdFVpUP2dWcumKO/5gsmgyFC3GOghr35uVdu7vrMu/u5/AsKZafczNx4BZg/G4h IPBA== ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=arc-20160816; h=list-id:precedence:in-reply-to:content-disposition:mime-version :references:message-id:subject:cc:to:from:date:dkim-signature :dkim-signature; bh=xhmews3hiohUWVZ2fQnwuQzL2BmbTvELU6RjyghQi08=; b=EAG+Jyz7bLPK6PiVlsYPTR6hEH1bV+bqUyF52ga22XDrcKVxihlUmTB9O46vnO2aga 1erM7CqbJODTEE5xR03eyOm/zwG9IyqVresqQxW+qb5IdOToo2IRjFmkLZoVMHU+XhAs E35wtieFb/1CX+W0tvp0dfM+Ido3mVmq1nIp6oCSAoAUIQnYJU7xychs9P5m7BJwclZK pLlg8Re3MYxbTBVO/wMfvpXe3kwGG6ajnYJlcvjLmCJfnXPRVU2dLwDnVJJav7j7hlh2 9rX3zvL7yfYY4CUZo9VY601vbXg0EKTNKsPqPf/es3tcXUlN3EpJo8z5b0hZSeLEvSKY 07Fg== ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; mx.google.com; dkim=pass header.i=@suse.de header.s=susede2_rsa header.b=jSj5Xuan; dkim=neutral (no key) header.i=@suse.de; spf=pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 2620:137:e000::1:20 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=NONE sp=NONE dis=NONE) header.from=suse.de Return-Path: Received: from out1.vger.email (out1.vger.email. [2620:137:e000::1:20]) by mx.google.com with ESMTP id f4si39177171pfc.210.2022.02.17.03.11.24; Thu, 17 Feb 2022 03:11:38 -0800 (PST) Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 2620:137:e000::1:20 as permitted sender) client-ip=2620:137:e000::1:20; Authentication-Results: mx.google.com; dkim=pass header.i=@suse.de header.s=susede2_rsa header.b=jSj5Xuan; dkim=neutral (no key) header.i=@suse.de; spf=pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 2620:137:e000::1:20 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=NONE sp=NONE dis=NONE) header.from=suse.de Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S239243AbiBQKkv (ORCPT + 99 others); Thu, 17 Feb 2022 05:40:51 -0500 Received: from mxb-00190b01.gslb.pphosted.com ([23.128.96.19]:50114 "EHLO lindbergh.monkeyblade.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S230462AbiBQKkt (ORCPT ); Thu, 17 Feb 2022 05:40:49 -0500 Received: from smtp-out2.suse.de (smtp-out2.suse.de [195.135.220.29]) by lindbergh.monkeyblade.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 7A4F8284D16 for ; Thu, 17 Feb 2022 02:40:35 -0800 (PST) Received: from imap2.suse-dmz.suse.de (imap2.suse-dmz.suse.de [192.168.254.74]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature ECDSA (P-521) server-digest SHA512) (No client certificate requested) by smtp-out2.suse.de (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 39C7C1F383; Thu, 17 Feb 2022 10:40:34 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=suse.de; s=susede2_rsa; t=1645094434; h=from:from:reply-to:date:date:message-id:message-id:to:to:cc:cc: mime-version:mime-version:content-type:content-type: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=xhmews3hiohUWVZ2fQnwuQzL2BmbTvELU6RjyghQi08=; b=jSj5Xuanh1Toei1k1Q94lP4CSI0WNhdInvMyC4HPu6A6CGm4EMQdOz9bHC57KuodIS0MwH UuB75aQ3gj3+Q026n8Y/iOmf5Itlhdnyi8ZkKCNZJb6EgOThcrH1N+1y8GEu9rZng9ws2l q9XS1+dbRRfkZIsK7WqMbeum/gneUxU= DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=ed25519-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=suse.de; s=susede2_ed25519; t=1645094434; h=from:from:reply-to:date:date:message-id:message-id:to:to:cc:cc: mime-version:mime-version:content-type:content-type: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=xhmews3hiohUWVZ2fQnwuQzL2BmbTvELU6RjyghQi08=; b=+8TkWSof3pEdblEHBwaLdQU3g/jum9Hcr88Ej619ZPdU7vLezllD2tiYjulZstHXKlsaUM m8kPvFrAe2XHXkBg== Received: from imap2.suse-dmz.suse.de (imap2.suse-dmz.suse.de [192.168.254.74]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature ECDSA (P-521) server-digest SHA512) (No client certificate requested) by imap2.suse-dmz.suse.de (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 6217913DD8; Thu, 17 Feb 2022 10:40:33 +0000 (UTC) Received: from dovecot-director2.suse.de ([192.168.254.65]) by imap2.suse-dmz.suse.de with ESMTPSA id NX+bFCEmDmKuRQAAMHmgww (envelope-from ); Thu, 17 Feb 2022 10:40:33 +0000 Date: Thu, 17 Feb 2022 11:40:31 +0100 From: Oscar Salvador To: Michal Hocko Cc: David Hildenbrand , Andrew Morton , linux-mm@kvack.org, LKML , Alexey Makhalov , Dennis Zhou , Eric Dumazet , Tejun Heo , Christoph Lameter , Nico Pache , Wei Yang , Rafael Aquini Subject: Re: [PATCH 4/6] mm, memory_hotplug: reorganize new pgdat initialization Message-ID: References: <20220127085305.20890-1-mhocko@kernel.org> <20220127085305.20890-5-mhocko@kernel.org> <6db33bb0-c72a-5539-5873-14039702e2a3@redhat.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.8 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,DKIM_VALID_EF,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW,SPF_HELO_NONE, SPF_PASS,T_SCC_BODY_TEXT_LINE autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.6 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.6 (2021-04-09) on lindbergh.monkeyblade.net Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Thu, Jan 27, 2022 at 03:44:21PM +0100, Michal Hocko wrote: > > I feel like we should be initializing all of this only once, just after > > allocating the node. There should be no difference between a node we're > > reusing and a "fresh" node. IOW, memory offlining should be resetting > > all state accordingly when the last memory goes away. > > > > But I might be wrong and this patch looks like an improvement, as you > > say, without functional change > > Yeah, I really wanted to have this simple and straightforward. To be > completely honest I am not even sure this is necessary. Something really > woth looking at. Seizing the opportunity that I had to look at this code and at x86's numa init code again I am preparing something to further sort this out and simplify it a bit. So I will have something soon unless someone beats me to it first. -- Oscar Salvador SUSE Labs