lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2020]   [Jan]   [22]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
    /
    Date
    From
    SubjectRe: [PATCH RFC v1] mm: is_mem_section_removable() overhaul
    On Wed 22-01-20 11:39:08, David Hildenbrand wrote:
    > >>> Really, the interface is flawed and should have never been merged in the
    > >>> first place. We cannot simply remove it altogether I am afraid so let's
    > >>> at least remove the bogus code and pretend that the world is a better
    > >>> place where everything is removable except the reality sucks...
    > >>
    > >> As I expressed already, the interface works as designed/documented and
    > >> has been used like that for years.
    > >
    > > It seems we do differ in the usefulness though. Using a crappy interface
    > > for years doesn't make it less crappy. I do realize we cannot remove the
    > > interface but we can remove issues with the implementation and I dare to
    > > say that most existing users wouldn't really notice.
    >
    > Well, at least powerpc-utils (why this interface was introduced) will
    > notice a) performance wise and b) because more logging output will be
    > generated (obviously non-offlineable blocks will be tried to offline).

    I would really appreciate some specific example for a real usecase. I am
    not familiar with powerpc-utils worklflows myself.
    --
    Michal Hocko
    SUSE Labs

    \
     
     \ /
      Last update: 2020-01-22 11:43    [W:7.071 / U:0.008 seconds]
    ©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site