On Wed, May 24, 2006 at 09:18:15AM +0900, KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki wrote:
> On Tue, 23 May 2006 07:52:03 -0700
> Ashok Raj <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> > On Tue, May 23, 2006 at 07:56:36PM +0900, KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki wrote:
> > > I found acpi container, which describes node, could evaluate cpu before
> > > memory. This means cpu-hot-add occurs before memory hot add.
> > >
> >
> > Is it possible to process memory before cpu in container hot-add code?
> >
>
> Maybe No. I know ACPI people doesn't want to add special handling for cpu/memory
> in a container. It complicates the code very much.
Iam not attached to the API change, so disassociating the node from cpu is ok.
It just feels a bit weird to say node is not online.
Probably ACPI doesnt give a precise way to put the dependencies (in a certain
order), there are EDL/EJD, but they have limitations and not directly imply
a dependency like this. But container code having to deal with this dependency
for add/remove is probably ok.
i hope container would eventually perform onlining the pieces from user space
scripts via udev like mechanisms.
I remember folks from SGI posting patches to cpu only nodes in the past.
Same way there are probably IO only nodes. Are you sure we cover these cases
as well.
>
> > > In most part, cpu-hot-add doesn't depend on node hot add.
> > > But register_cpu, which creates symbolic link from node to cpu, requires
> >
> > Dont you need all per-cpu allocated on that node? Or is it from node0 or
> > something for all hotpluggable cpus?
> >
--
Cheers,
Ashok Raj
- Open Source Technology Center
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [email protected]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
[Index of Archives]
[Kernel Newbies]
[Netfilter]
[Bugtraq]
[Photo]
[Stuff]
[Gimp]
[Yosemite News]
[MIPS Linux]
[ARM Linux]
[Linux Security]
[Linux RAID]
[Video 4 Linux]
[Linux for the blind]
[Linux Resources]
