"Naveen N. Rao" <naveen.n....@linux.vnet.ibm.com> writes: > Nathan Lynch wrote: >> Aravinda Prasad <aravi...@linux.vnet.ibm.com> writes: >>> Calculating the maximum memory based on the number of lmbs >>> and lmb size does not account for the RMA region. Hence >>> use memory_hotplug_max(), which already accounts for the >>> RMA region, to fetch the maximum memory value. Thanks to >>> Nathan Lynch for suggesting the memory_hotplug_max() >>> function. >> >> Well, I hope I haven't led you astray... will it give you the desired >> result on a kernel configured without memory hotplug support, booted in >> an LPAR with some huge pages configured? >> >> If so, then >> Acked-by: Nathan Lynch <nath...@linux.ibm.com> >> >> It would likely help with review and future maintenance if the semantics >> and intended use of the MaxMem field are made a little more >> explicit. For example, is it supposed to include persistent memory? >> Perhaps a follow-up patch could address this. Or maybe I'm overthinking >> it. > > This was primarily aimed to replicate what AIX lparstat does and > documentation (*) just says: > > Maximum Memory > Maximum possible amount of Memory. > > I think this mirrors the maximum memory value set in the LPAR profile, > and this provides a way to obtain that value from within the LPAR.
But the doc string for memory_hotplug_max() says: * memory_hotplug_max - return max address of memory that may be added ie. maximum *address* not maximum *amount*. Possibly it turns out to be the same value, but that is just because you have no holes in your layout. So I don't think this patch is correct. cheers
