Re: [RFC PATCH] mm, hotplug: get rid of auto_online_blocks

From	Heiko Carstens <heiko.carstens@de.ibm.com>
Newsgroups	linux.kernel
Subject	Re: [RFC PATCH] mm, hotplug: get rid of auto_online_blocks
Date	2017-02-28 14:40 +0100
Message-ID	<tfQau-51i-29@gated-at.bofh.it> (permalink)
References	<tfqpI-45z-19@gated-at.bofh.it> <tfqpI-45z-25@gated-at.bofh.it> <tfrF8-4Ql-33@gated-at.bofh.it> <tfvIJ-7An-9@gated-at.bofh.it>
Organization	linux.* mail to news gateway

Show all headers | View raw

On Mon, Feb 27, 2017 at 04:43:04PM +0100, Michal Hocko wrote:
> On Mon 27-02-17 12:25:10, Heiko Carstens wrote:
> > On Mon, Feb 27, 2017 at 11:02:09AM +0100, Vitaly Kuznetsov wrote:
> > > A couple of other thoughts:
> > > 1) Having all newly added memory online ASAP is probably what people
> > > want for all virtual machines.
> > 
> > This is not true for s390. On s390 we have "standby" memory that a guest
> > sees and potentially may use if it sets it online. Every guest that sets
> > memory offline contributes to the hypervisor's standby memory pool, while
> > onlining standby memory takes memory away from the standby pool.
> > 
> > The use-case is that a system administrator in advance knows the maximum
> > size a guest will ever have and also defines how much memory should be used
> > at boot time. The difference is standby memory.
> > 
> > Auto-onlining of standby memory is the last thing we want.
> > 
> > > Unfortunately, we have additional complexity with memory zones
> > > (ZONE_NORMAL, ZONE_MOVABLE) and in some cases manual intervention is
> > > required. Especially, when further unplug is expected.
> > 
> > This also is a reason why auto-onlining doesn't seem be the best way.
> 
> Can you imagine any situation when somebody actually might want to have
> this knob enabled? From what I understand it doesn't seem to be the
> case.

I can only speak for s390, and at least here I think auto-online is always
wrong, especially if you consider the added complexity that you may want to
online memory sometimes to ZONE_NORMAL and sometimes to ZONE_MOVABLE.

Thread

[RFC PATCH] mm, hotplug: get rid of auto_online_blocks Michal Hocko <mhocko@kernel.org> - 2017-02-27 11:10 +0100
  Re: [RFC PATCH] mm, hotplug: get rid of auto_online_blocks Vitaly Kuznetsov <vkuznets@redhat.com> - 2017-02-27 11:10 +0100
    Re: [RFC PATCH] mm, hotplug: get rid of auto_online_blocks Michal Hocko <mhocko@kernel.org> - 2017-02-27 11:40 +0100
      Re: [RFC PATCH] mm, hotplug: get rid of auto_online_blocks Vitaly Kuznetsov <vkuznets@redhat.com> - 2017-02-27 12:00 +0100
        Re: [RFC PATCH] mm, hotplug: get rid of auto_online_blocks Vitaly Kuznetsov <vkuznets@redhat.com> - 2017-02-27 14:20 +0100
        Re: [RFC PATCH] mm, hotplug: get rid of auto_online_blocks Michal Hocko <mhocko@kernel.org> - 2017-02-27 16:30 +0100
    Re: [RFC PATCH] mm, hotplug: get rid of auto_online_blocks Heiko Carstens <heiko.carstens@de.ibm.com> - 2017-02-27 12:30 +0100
      Re: [RFC PATCH] mm, hotplug: get rid of auto_online_blocks Vitaly Kuznetsov <vkuznets@redhat.com> - 2017-02-27 13:00 +0100
      Re: [RFC PATCH] mm, hotplug: get rid of auto_online_blocks Michal Hocko <mhocko@kernel.org> - 2017-02-27 16:50 +0100
        Re: [RFC PATCH] mm, hotplug: get rid of auto_online_blocks Heiko Carstens <heiko.carstens@de.ibm.com> - 2017-02-28 14:40 +0100
  Re: [RFC PATCH] mm, hotplug: get rid of auto_online_blocks Michal Hocko <mhocko@kernel.org> - 2017-02-27 19:30 +0100
  Re: [RFC PATCH] mm, hotplug: get rid of auto_online_blocks Reza Arbab <arbab@linux.vnet.ibm.com> - 2017-02-28 00:40 +0100

csiph-web