Re: [PATCH] [RESEND] x86_64: add memory hotremove config option

Previous message: [thread] [date] [author]
Next message: [thread] [date] [author]
From: Nick Piggin
Date: Monday, September 8, 2008 - 6:48 am

On Monday 08 September 2008 21:30, Andi Kleen wrote:

Well, just for executing code (and reading RO data), then it shouldn't
matter at all actually if the CPU starts executing from the new page
or the old page, so long as there is a way to quiesce NMIs before freeing
the old page.

So the NMI can run, and read data, but it may have a problem with stores.
At least, some kind of redesign of NMI handlers might be required so that
they can make a note of the pending operation and try to do something
sane in that case. Or, there could be a small region of memory; a page or
two, which does not get migrated and NMIs can write to it. I don't think
you need to go so far as saying the entire kernel image must be non
movable just for NMIs.



Are there any important NMIs that really can't fit with this?



I don't see it. It is among one of the things a hypervisor may do.
But anyway, call it what you will.
--
Previous message: [thread] [date] [author]
Next message: [thread] [date] [author]

Messages in current thread:
Re: [PATCH] [RESEND] x86_64: add memory hotremove config o ..., Nick Piggin, (Mon Sep 8, 6:48 am)
[PATCH] Cleanup to make remove_memory() arch neutral, Badari Pulavarty, (Mon Sep 8, 2:52 pm)
[PATCH] x86: add memory hotremove config option, Badari Pulavarty, (Mon Sep 8, 2:56 pm)
Re: [PATCH] Cleanup to make remove_memory() arch neutral, Badari Pulavarty, (Tue Sep 9, 8:12 am)