Re: [RESEND PATCH v2] memory-hotplug: fix store_mem_state() return value
From: David Rientjes
Date: Wed Aug 31 2016 - 20:28:41 EST
On Wed, 31 Aug 2016, Reza Arbab wrote:
> > Nope, the return value of changing state from online to online was
> > established almost 11 years ago in commit 3947be1969a9.
> Fair enough. So if online-to-online is -EINVAL,
online-to-online for state is -EINVAL, it has been since 2005.
> 1. Shouldn't 'echo 1 > online' then also return -EINVAL?
No, it's a different tunable. There's no requirement that two different
tunables that do a similar thing have the same return values: the former
existed long before device_online() and still exists for backwards
> 2. store_mem_state() still needs a tweak, right? It was only returning -EINVAL
> by accident, due to the convoluted sequence I listed in the patch.
Yes, absolutely. It returning -EINVAL for "nline" is what is accidently
preserving it's backwards compatibility :) Note that device_online()
returns 1 if already online and memory_subsys_online() returns 0 if online
in this case. So we want store_mem_state() to return -EINVAL if
device_online() returns non-zero (this was in my first email).