Messages in this thread | ![/](/images/icornerl.gif) | | Date | Thu, 4 Dec 2003 10:54:26 +0100 | From | Pavel Machek <> | Subject | Re: [Lhms-devel] RE: memory hotremove prototype, take 3 |
| |
Hi!
> > > > IMHO, To hot-remove memory, memory attribute should be divided > > > > into Hotpluggable and no-Hotpluggable, and each attribute memory > > > > should be allocated each unit(ex. node). > > > > > > Why? I still don't get that -- we should be able to use the virtual > > > addressing mechanism of any CPU to swap under the rug any virtual > > > address without needing to do anything more than allocate a page frame > > > for the new physical location > > > > My understanding is that the kernel and device drivers sometimes > > assume physical memory address is not changed. > > For example, IA32 kernel often uses __PAGE_OFFSET. > > I suppose that there are many case which the kernel and device drivers > > assume physical address is not changed like this. > > Even if we use Mr. Iwamoto's method use, some memories will remain. > > Grrrr ... my concern is that Murphy's Law says that we'll need to hotplug > the memory that we cannot in most of the cases (pray not). I guess I will > need to research some more to think how to do it. > > I still think we could use the CPU's virtualization mechanism--of course, > and as you and Tony Luck mention, we'd had to track down and modify the > parts that assume physical memory et al. That they use large pages > or
...which means basically auditing whole kernel, and rewriting half of drivers. Good luck with _that_. Pavel -- Horseback riding is like software... ...vgf orggre jura vgf serr. - 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/
| ![\](/images/icornerr.gif) |