Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] [REPOST] mm: show node to memory section
	relationship with symlinks in sysfs
From: Dave Hansen <dave@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
To: Gary Hade <garyhade@us.ibm.com>
Cc: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>, linux-mm@kvack.org,
       linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, y-goto@jp.fujitsu.com, pbadari@us.ibm.com,
       mel@csn.ul.ie, lcm@us.ibm.com, mingo@elte.hu, greg@kroah.com,
       nish.aravamudan@gmail.com
In-Reply-To: <20081013163416.GA7340@us.ibm.com>
References: <20081009192115.GB8793@us.ibm.com>
	 <20081010124239.f92b5568.akpm@linux-foundation.org>
	 <20081010213357.GD7369@us.ibm.com>
	 <20081010145950.f51def29.akpm@linux-foundation.org>
	 <20081010231844.GA1718@us.ibm.com>
	 <20081010163230.ae9d964d.akpm@linux-foundation.org>
	 <20081013163416.GA7340@us.ibm.com>
Content-Type: text/plain
Date: Mon, 13 Oct 2008 09:40:35 -0700
Message-Id: <1223916035.29877.10.camel@nimitz>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Content-Length: 958
Lines: 21

On Mon, 2008-10-13 at 09:34 -0700, Gary Hade wrote:
> I understand your concerns about adding possibly frivolous interfaces
> but in this case we are simply eliminating a very obvious hole in the
> existing set of memory hot-add/remove interfaces.  In general, it
> makes absolutely no sense to provide a resource add/remove mechanism
> without telling the user where the resource is physically located.

Does it help we export the phys_index (basically the section number) as
part of the section directory?

I don't think we export the physical memory ranges of NUMA nodes.  But,
if we did that as well, it would allow userspace to do this association
without troubling the kernel with maintaining it.

-- Dave

--
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/