similar to: [PATCH v1] MAINTAINERS: add URL for virtio-mem

virtio-mem: add memory via add_memory_driver_managed() On Thu, Jun 11, 2020 at 11:35:18AM +0200, David Hildenbrand wrote: > Virtio-mem managed memory is always detected and added by the virtio-mem > driver, never using something like the firmware-provided memory map. > This is the case after an ordinary system reboot, and has to be guaranteed > after kexec. Especially, virtio-mem

Virtio-mem managed memory is always detected and added by the virtio-mem driver, never using something like the firmware-provided memory map. This is the case after an ordinary system reboot, and has to be guaranteed after kexec. Especially, virtio-mem added memory resources can contain inaccessible parts ("unblocked memory blocks"), blindly forwarding them to a kexec kernel is

Virtio-mem managed memory is always detected and added by the virtio-mem driver, never using something like the firmware-provided memory map. This is the case after an ordinary system reboot, and has to be guaranteed after kexec. Especially, virtio-mem added memory resources can contain inaccessible parts ("unblocked memory blocks"), blindly forwarding them to a kexec kernel is

On Thu, May 07, 2020 at 12:31:04PM +0200, David Hildenbrand wrote: > This series is based on latest linux-next. The patches are located at: > https://github.com/davidhildenbrand/linux.git virtio-mem-v3 > > Patch #1 - #10 where contained in v2 and only contain minor modifications > (mostly smaller fixes). The remaining patches are new and contain smaller > optimizations.

We soon want to pass flags, e.g., to mark added System RAM resources. mergeable. Prepare for that. This patch is based on a similar patch by Oscar Salvador: https://lkml.kernel.org/r/20190625075227.15193-3-osalvador at suse.de Acked-by: Wei Liu <wei.liu at kernel.org> Cc: Andrew Morton <akpm at linux-foundation.org> Cc: Michal Hocko <mhocko at suse.com> Cc: Dan Williams

We soon want to pass flags, e.g., to mark added System RAM resources. mergeable. Prepare for that. This patch is based on a similar patch by Oscar Salvador: https://lkml.kernel.org/r/20190625075227.15193-3-osalvador at suse.de Acked-by: Wei Liu <wei.liu at kernel.org> Reviewed-by: Juergen Gross <jgross at suse.com> # Xen related part Cc: Andrew Morton <akpm at

On 02.03.20 14:49, David Hildenbrand wrote: > This series is based on latest linux-next. The patches are located at: > https://github.com/davidhildenbrand/linux.git virtio-mem-v1 > > The basic idea of virtio-mem is to provide a flexible, > cross-architecture memory hot(un)plug solution that avoids many limitations > imposed by existing technologies, architectures, and

@Andrew, @Mst, I suggest the whole series (including the virtio-mem change) goes via the -mm tree. Currently, virtio-mem does not really support ZONE_MOVABLE. While it allows to online fully plugged memory blocks to ZONE_MOVABLE, it does not allow to online partially-plugged memory blocks to ZONE_MOVABLE and will never consider such memory blocks when unplugging memory. This might be surprising

For 5.10. Patch #1-#4,#6 have RBs or ACKs, patch #5 is virtio-mem stuff maintained by me. This should go via the -mm tree. --- When introducing virtio-mem, the semantics of ZONE_MOVABLE were rather unclear, which is why we special-cased ZONE_MOVABLE such that partially plugged blocks would never end up in ZONE_MOVABLE. Now that the semantics are much clearer (and are documented in patch #6),

For 5.10. Patch #1-#4,#6 have RBs or ACKs, patch #5 is virtio-mem stuff maintained by me. This should go via the -mm tree. --- When introducing virtio-mem, the semantics of ZONE_MOVABLE were rather unclear, which is why we special-cased ZONE_MOVABLE such that partially plugged blocks would never end up in ZONE_MOVABLE. Now that the semantics are much clearer (and are documented in patch #6),

@Andrew can we give this a churn and consider it for v5.9 in case there are no more comments? Patch #1-#4 have RB's, patch #5 is virtio-mem stuff maintained by me, patch #6 is just a doc update. --- Currently, virtio-mem does not really support ZONE_MOVABLE. While it allows to online fully plugged memory blocks to ZONE_MOVABLE, it does not allow to online partially-plugged memory blocks to

@Andrew can we give this a churn and consider it for v5.9 in case there are no more comments? Patch #1-#4 have RB's, patch #5 is virtio-mem stuff maintained by me, patch #6 is just a doc update. --- Currently, virtio-mem does not really support ZONE_MOVABLE. While it allows to online fully plugged memory blocks to ZONE_MOVABLE, it does not allow to online partially-plugged memory blocks to

@Andrew can we give this a churn and consider it for v5.9 in case there are no more comments? Patch #1-#4,#6 have RBss or ACKs, patch #5 is virtio-mem stuff maintained by me (and MST is aware). --- When introducing virtio-mem, the semantics of ZONE_MOVABLE were rather unclear, which is why we special-cased ZONE_MOVABLE such that partially plugged blocks would never end up in ZONE_MOVABLE. Now

@Andrew can we give this a churn and consider it for v5.9 in case there are no more comments? Patch #1-#4,#6 have RBss or ACKs, patch #5 is virtio-mem stuff maintained by me (and MST is aware). --- When introducing virtio-mem, the semantics of ZONE_MOVABLE were rather unclear, which is why we special-cased ZONE_MOVABLE such that partially plugged blocks would never end up in ZONE_MOVABLE. Now

Let's reuse the new mechanism to merge system ram resources below the root. We are the only one hotplugging system ram (e.g., DIMMs don't apply), so this is safe to be used. Cc: Andrew Morton <akpm at linux-foundation.org> Cc: Michal Hocko <mhocko at suse.com> Cc: Boris Ostrovsky <boris.ostrovsky at oracle.com> Cc: Juergen Gross <jgross at suse.com> Cc: Stefano

On Thu, May 07, 2020 at 12:31:14PM +0200, David Hildenbrand wrote: > Let's make sure patches/bug reports find the right person. > > Cc: "Michael S. Tsirkin" <mst at redhat.com> > Signed-off-by: David Hildenbrand <david at redhat.com> Make this patch 2 in the series, or even squash into patch 1. > --- > MAINTAINERS | 7 +++++++ > 1 file changed, 7

On 21.08.20 12:34, David Hildenbrand wrote: > Let's reuse the new mechanism to merge system ram resources below the > root. We are the only one hotplugging system ram (e.g., DIMMs don't apply), > so this is safe to be used. > > Cc: Andrew Morton <akpm at linux-foundation.org> > Cc: Michal Hocko <mhocko at suse.com> > Cc: Boris Ostrovsky <boris.ostrovsky

This is the follow-up of "[PATCH RFCv1 0/5] mm/memory_hotplug: selective merging of memory resources" [1] Some add_memory*() users add memory in small, contiguous memory blocks. Examples include virtio-mem, hyper-v balloon, and the XEN balloon. This can quickly result in a lot of memory resources, whereby the actual resource boundaries are not of interest (e.g., it might be relevant

Hi David, I love your patch! Yet something to improve: [auto build test ERROR on pm/linux-next] [also build test ERROR on linus/master v5.6-rc4 next-20200302] [cannot apply to linux/master mmotm/master] [if your patch is applied to the wrong git tree, please drop us a note to help improve the system. BTW, we also suggest to use '--base' option to specify the base tree in git

Let's make sure patches/bug reports find the right person. Cc: "Michael S. Tsirkin" <mst at redhat.com> Signed-off-by: David Hildenbrand <david at redhat.com> --- MAINTAINERS | 7 +++++++ 1 file changed, 7 insertions(+) diff --git a/MAINTAINERS b/MAINTAINERS index 4d43ea5468b5..ad2b34f4dd66 100644 --- a/MAINTAINERS +++ b/MAINTAINERS @@ -18037,6 +18037,13 @@ S: