Re: [ANNOUNCE] [PATCH] Node Hotplug Support
From: Keiichiro Tokunaga
Date: Thu May 13 2004 - 01:37:28 EST
On Wed, 12 May 2004 19:04:47 -0700
Dave Hansen <haveblue@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> On Wed, 2004-05-12 at 18:27, Keiichiro Tokunaga wrote:
> > On Sun, 09 May 2004 22:45:42 -0700
> > Dave Hansen <haveblue@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > > On Sun, 2004-05-09 at 18:47, Keiichiro Tokunaga wrote:
> > > > There is no NUMA support in the current code yet. I'll post a
> > > > rough patch to show my idea soon. I'm thinking to regard a
> > > > container device that has PXM as a NUMA node so far.
> > >
> > > Don't you think it would be a good idea to work with some of the current
> > > code, instead of trying to wrap around it?
> > Are you saying that LHNS should use the current NUMA code
> > (or coming code in the future) to support NUMA node hotplug?
> Absolutely. Why do we need wrappers when we can offline entire nodes
> with 6-line shell scripts? The CPU hotplug interfaces are here today
> and the memory stuff will be here soon. Perhaps you could help with the
> NUMA part.
> for i in $NODEDIR/cpu* $NODEDIR/memory*; do
> echo 0 > $i/control/online
> echo 0 > $NODEDIR/control/online
> We don't currently export bus to node mappings in sysfs, but we have
> them in the kernel, so that won't be too hard to export as well.
LHNS is focusing on "container device hotplug". Container device
could contain CPUs, memory, and/or IO devices. Container device
could contain only IO devices. In this case, LHNS cannot use
$NODED/control/online (NUMA stuff) for the container device.
By the way, what happen when you issue
"echo 0 > $NODEDIR/control/online"? Can you detach it
from the system after echo-ing?
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/