Re: [RFC PATCH] memory-hotplug: Use dev_online for memhp_auto_offline

2017-02-24 Thread Vitaly Kuznetsov
Michal Hocko writes: > On Fri 24-02-17 17:40:25, Vitaly Kuznetsov wrote: >> Michal Hocko writes: >> >> > On Fri 24-02-17 17:09:13, Vitaly Kuznetsov wrote: > [...] >> >> While this will most probably work for me I still disagree with the >> >> concept of 'one size fits all' here and the default

Re: [RFC PATCH] memory-hotplug: Use dev_online for memhp_auto_offline

2017-02-24 Thread Michal Hocko
On Fri 24-02-17 17:40:25, Vitaly Kuznetsov wrote: > Michal Hocko writes: > > > On Fri 24-02-17 17:09:13, Vitaly Kuznetsov wrote: [...] > >> While this will most probably work for me I still disagree with the > >> concept of 'one size fits all' here and the default 'false' for ACPI, > >> we're tak

Re: [RFC PATCH] memory-hotplug: Use dev_online for memhp_auto_offline

2017-02-24 Thread Vitaly Kuznetsov
Michal Hocko writes: > On Fri 24-02-17 17:09:13, Vitaly Kuznetsov wrote: >> I have a smal guest and I want to add more memory to it and the >> result is ... OOM. Not something I expected. > > Which is not all that unexpected if you use a technology which has to > allocated in order to add more

Re: [RFC PATCH] memory-hotplug: Use dev_online for memhp_auto_offline

2017-02-24 Thread Michal Hocko
On Fri 24-02-17 17:09:13, Vitaly Kuznetsov wrote: > Michal Hocko writes: > > > On Fri 24-02-17 16:05:18, Vitaly Kuznetsov wrote: > >> Michal Hocko writes: > >> > >> > On Fri 24-02-17 15:10:29, Vitaly Kuznetsov wrote: > > [...] > >> >> Just did a quick (and probably dirty) test, increasing guest

Re: [RFC PATCH] memory-hotplug: Use dev_online for memhp_auto_offline

2017-02-24 Thread Vitaly Kuznetsov
Michal Hocko writes: > On Fri 24-02-17 16:05:18, Vitaly Kuznetsov wrote: >> Michal Hocko writes: >> >> > On Fri 24-02-17 15:10:29, Vitaly Kuznetsov wrote: > [...] >> >> Just did a quick (and probably dirty) test, increasing guest memory from >> >> 4G to 8G (32 x 128mb blocks) require 68Mb of me

Re: [RFC PATCH] memory-hotplug: Use dev_online for memhp_auto_offline

2017-02-24 Thread Michal Hocko
On Fri 24-02-17 16:05:18, Vitaly Kuznetsov wrote: > Michal Hocko writes: > > > On Fri 24-02-17 15:10:29, Vitaly Kuznetsov wrote: [...] > >> Just did a quick (and probably dirty) test, increasing guest memory from > >> 4G to 8G (32 x 128mb blocks) require 68Mb of memory, so it's roughly 2Mb > >> p

Re: [RFC PATCH] memory-hotplug: Use dev_online for memhp_auto_offline

2017-02-24 Thread Vitaly Kuznetsov
Michal Hocko writes: > On Fri 24-02-17 15:10:29, Vitaly Kuznetsov wrote: >> Michal Hocko writes: >> >> > On Thu 23-02-17 19:14:27, Vitaly Kuznetsov wrote: > [...] >> >> Virtual guests under stress were getting into OOM easily and the OOM >> >> killer was even killing the udev process trying to

Re: [RFC PATCH] memory-hotplug: Use dev_online for memhp_auto_offline

2017-02-24 Thread Michal Hocko
On Fri 24-02-17 15:10:29, Vitaly Kuznetsov wrote: > Michal Hocko writes: > > > On Thu 23-02-17 19:14:27, Vitaly Kuznetsov wrote: [...] > >> Virtual guests under stress were getting into OOM easily and the OOM > >> killer was even killing the udev process trying to online the > >> memory. > > > >

Re: [RFC PATCH] memory-hotplug: Use dev_online for memhp_auto_offline

2017-02-24 Thread Vitaly Kuznetsov
Michal Hocko writes: > On Thu 23-02-17 19:14:27, Vitaly Kuznetsov wrote: >> Michal Hocko writes: >> >> > On Thu 23-02-17 17:36:38, Vitaly Kuznetsov wrote: >> >> Michal Hocko writes: >> > [...] >> >> > Is a grow from 256M -> 128GB really something that happens in real life? >> >> > Don't get me

Re: [RFC PATCH] memory-hotplug: Use dev_online for memhp_auto_offline

2017-02-24 Thread Michal Hocko
On Thu 23-02-17 19:14:27, Vitaly Kuznetsov wrote: > Michal Hocko writes: > > > On Thu 23-02-17 17:36:38, Vitaly Kuznetsov wrote: > >> Michal Hocko writes: > > [...] > >> > Is a grow from 256M -> 128GB really something that happens in real life? > >> > Don't get me wrong but to me this sounds qui

Re: [RFC PATCH] memory-hotplug: Use dev_online for memhp_auto_offline

2017-02-23 Thread Vitaly Kuznetsov
Michal Hocko writes: > On Thu 23-02-17 17:36:38, Vitaly Kuznetsov wrote: >> Michal Hocko writes: > [...] >> > Is a grow from 256M -> 128GB really something that happens in real life? >> > Don't get me wrong but to me this sounds quite exaggerated. Hotmem add >> > which is an operation which has

Re: [RFC PATCH] memory-hotplug: Use dev_online for memhp_auto_offline

2017-02-23 Thread Michal Hocko
On Thu 23-02-17 17:36:38, Vitaly Kuznetsov wrote: > Michal Hocko writes: [...] > > Is a grow from 256M -> 128GB really something that happens in real life? > > Don't get me wrong but to me this sounds quite exaggerated. Hotmem add > > which is an operation which has to allocate memory has to scale

Re: [RFC PATCH] memory-hotplug: Use dev_online for memhp_auto_offline

2017-02-23 Thread Vitaly Kuznetsov
Michal Hocko writes: > On Thu 23-02-17 16:49:06, Vitaly Kuznetsov wrote: >> Michal Hocko writes: >> >> > On Thu 23-02-17 14:31:24, Vitaly Kuznetsov wrote: >> >> Michal Hocko writes: >> >> >> >> > On Wed 22-02-17 10:32:34, Vitaly Kuznetsov wrote: >> >> > [...] >> >> >> > There is a workaround

Re: [RFC PATCH] memory-hotplug: Use dev_online for memhp_auto_offline

2017-02-23 Thread Michal Hocko
On Thu 23-02-17 16:49:06, Vitaly Kuznetsov wrote: > Michal Hocko writes: > > > On Thu 23-02-17 14:31:24, Vitaly Kuznetsov wrote: > >> Michal Hocko writes: > >> > >> > On Wed 22-02-17 10:32:34, Vitaly Kuznetsov wrote: > >> > [...] > >> >> > There is a workaround in that a user could online the m

Re: [RFC PATCH] memory-hotplug: Use dev_online for memhp_auto_offline

2017-02-23 Thread Vitaly Kuznetsov
Michal Hocko writes: > On Thu 23-02-17 14:31:24, Vitaly Kuznetsov wrote: >> Michal Hocko writes: >> >> > On Wed 22-02-17 10:32:34, Vitaly Kuznetsov wrote: >> > [...] >> >> > There is a workaround in that a user could online the memory or have >> >> > a udev rule to online the memory by using th

Re: [RFC PATCH] memory-hotplug: Use dev_online for memhp_auto_offline

2017-02-23 Thread Michal Hocko
On Thu 23-02-17 14:31:24, Vitaly Kuznetsov wrote: > Michal Hocko writes: > > > On Wed 22-02-17 10:32:34, Vitaly Kuznetsov wrote: > > [...] > >> > There is a workaround in that a user could online the memory or have > >> > a udev rule to online the memory by using the sysfs interface. The > >> > s

Re: [RFC PATCH] memory-hotplug: Use dev_online for memhp_auto_offline

2017-02-23 Thread Vitaly Kuznetsov
Michal Hocko writes: > On Wed 22-02-17 10:32:34, Vitaly Kuznetsov wrote: > [...] >> > There is a workaround in that a user could online the memory or have >> > a udev rule to online the memory by using the sysfs interface. The >> > sysfs interface to online memory goes through device_online() whi

Re: [RFC PATCH] memory-hotplug: Use dev_online for memhp_auto_offline

2017-02-23 Thread Michal Hocko
On Wed 22-02-17 10:32:34, Vitaly Kuznetsov wrote: [...] > > There is a workaround in that a user could online the memory or have > > a udev rule to online the memory by using the sysfs interface. The > > sysfs interface to online memory goes through device_online() which > > should updated the dev-

Re: [RFC PATCH] memory-hotplug: Use dev_online for memhp_auto_offline

2017-02-22 Thread Vitaly Kuznetsov
Hi, s,memhp_auto_offline,memhp_auto_online, in the subject please :-) Nathan Fontenot writes: > Commit 31bc3858e "add automatic onlining policy for the newly added memory" > provides the capability to have added memory automatically onlined > during add, but this appears to be slightly broken.