Messages in this thread | | | Date | Tue, 29 Jun 2010 11:04:15 -0700 | From | Greg KH <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH] memory hotplug disable boot option |
| |
On Tue, Jun 29, 2010 at 09:03:04AM -0700, Dave Hansen wrote: > On Tue, 2010-06-29 at 11:56 +0900, KOSAKI Motohiro wrote: > > > On Mon, 2010-06-28 at 08:44 -0700, Greg KH wrote: > > > > > The directories being created are the standard directories, one for each of the memory > > > > > sections present at boot. I think the most used files in each of these directories > > > > > is the state and removable file used to do memory hotplug. > > > > > > > > And perhaps we shouldn't really be creating so many directories? Why > > > > not work with the memory hotplug developers to change their interface to > > > > not abuse sysfs in such a manner? > > > > > > Heh, it wasn't abuse until we got this much memory. But, I think this > > > one is pretty much 100% my fault. > > > > > > Nathan, I think the right fix here is probably to untie sysfs from the > > > sections a bit. We should be able to have sysfs dirs that represent > > > more than one contiguous SECTION_SIZE area of memory. > > > > Why do we need abi breakage? Yourself talked about we guess ppc don't > > actually need 16MB section. I think IBM folks have to confirm it. > > If our guessing is correct, the firmware fixing is only necessary. > > >From the mouth of the kernel dumbass who coded this up: it's not the > firmware's fault. We shouldn't punt this to them, and the proper fix > _isn't_ in the firmware, plus they may have other more fundamental > reasons to keep the LMB sizes what they are.
I agree, this should be fixed in the api to userspace, having this many sysfs directories and/or files is just looney.
thanks,
greg k-h
| |