Displaying 5 results from an estimated 5 matches for "aparat".
Did you mean:
aparant
2019 Oct 23
2
[PATCH RFC v3 6/9] mm: Allow to offline PageOffline() pages with a reference count of 0
...ne pages. Reference count should never be != 0
at this stage.
> In summary, is what you suggest simply delaying setting the reference count to 0
> in MEM_GOING_OFFLINE instead of right away when the driver unpluggs the pages?
Yes
> What's the big benefit you see and I fail to see?
Aparat from no hooks into __put_page it is also an explicit control over
the page via reference counting. Do you see any downsides?
--
Michal Hocko
SUSE Labs
2019 Oct 23
2
[PATCH RFC v3 6/9] mm: Allow to offline PageOffline() pages with a reference count of 0
...ne pages. Reference count should never be != 0
at this stage.
> In summary, is what you suggest simply delaying setting the reference count to 0
> in MEM_GOING_OFFLINE instead of right away when the driver unpluggs the pages?
Yes
> What's the big benefit you see and I fail to see?
Aparat from no hooks into __put_page it is also an explicit control over
the page via reference counting. Do you see any downsides?
--
Michal Hocko
SUSE Labs
2019 Oct 23
0
[PATCH RFC v3 6/9] mm: Allow to offline PageOffline() pages with a reference count of 0
...my current patch.
>
>> In summary, is what you suggest simply delaying setting the reference count to 0
>> in MEM_GOING_OFFLINE instead of right away when the driver unpluggs the pages?
>
> Yes
>
>> What's the big benefit you see and I fail to see?
>
> Aparat from no hooks into __put_page it is also an explicit control over
> the page via reference counting. Do you see any downsides?
The only downside I see is that we get more false negatives on
has_unmovable_pages(), eventually resulting in the offlining stage after
isolation to loop forever (as...
2019 Oct 22
2
[PATCH RFC v3 6/9] mm: Allow to offline PageOffline() pages with a reference count of 0
On Fri 18-10-19 14:35:06, David Hildenbrand wrote:
> On 18.10.19 13:20, Michal Hocko wrote:
> > On Fri 18-10-19 10:50:24, David Hildenbrand wrote:
> > > On 18.10.19 10:15, Michal Hocko wrote:
[...]
> > > > for that - MEM_GOING_OFFLINE notification. This sounds like a good place
> > > > for the driver to decide whether it is safe to let the page go or not.
2019 Oct 22
2
[PATCH RFC v3 6/9] mm: Allow to offline PageOffline() pages with a reference count of 0
On Fri 18-10-19 14:35:06, David Hildenbrand wrote:
> On 18.10.19 13:20, Michal Hocko wrote:
> > On Fri 18-10-19 10:50:24, David Hildenbrand wrote:
> > > On 18.10.19 10:15, Michal Hocko wrote:
[...]
> > > > for that - MEM_GOING_OFFLINE notification. This sounds like a good place
> > > > for the driver to decide whether it is safe to let the page go or not.