lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2010]   [Aug]   [31]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
    /
    SubjectRe: [PATCH 0/8] v5 De-couple sysfs memory directories from memory sections
    From
    Date
    On Mon, 2010-08-16 at 09:34 -0500, Nathan Fontenot wrote:
    > > It's not an unresolvable issue, as this is a must-fix problem. But you
    > > should tell us what your proposal is to prevent breakage of existing
    > > installations. A Kconfig option would be good, but a boot-time kernel
    > > command line option which selects the new format would be much better.
    >
    > This shouldn't break existing installations, unless an architecture chooses
    > to do so. With my patch only the powerpc/pseries arch is updated such that
    > what is seen in userspace is different.

    Even if an arch defines the override for the sysfs dir size, I still
    don't think this breaks anything (it shouldn't). We move _all_ of the
    directories over, all at once, to a single, uniform size. The only
    apparent change to a user moving kernels would be a larger
    block_size_bytes (which is certainly not changing the ABI) and a new
    sysfs file for the end of the section. The new sysfs file is
    _completely_ redundant at this point.

    The architecture is only supposed to bump up the directory size when it
    *KNOWS* that all operations will be done at the larger section size,
    such as if the specific hardware has physical DIMMs which are much
    larger than SECTION_SIZE.

    Let's say we have a system with 20MB of memory, SECTION_SIZE of 1MB and
    a sysfs dir size of 4MB.

    Before the patch, we have 20 directories: one for each section. After
    this patch, we have 5 directories.

    The thing that I think is the next step, but that we _will_ probably
    need eventually is this, take the 5 sysfs dirs in the above case:

    0->3, 4->7, 8->11, 12->15, 16->19

    and turn that into a single one:

    0->19

    *That* will require changing the ABI, but we could certainly have some
    bloated and slow, but backward-compatible mode.

    -- Dave



    \
     
     \ /
      Last update: 2010-08-31 20:15    [W:0.040 / U:30.132 seconds]
    ©2003-2016 Jasper Spaans. hosted at Digital OceanAdvertise on this site