Re: Re: RE(2): FW: [LSF/MM/BPF TOPIC] SMDK inspired MM changes for CXL

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



On Fri, Mar 31, 2023 at 08:37:15PM +0900, Kyungsan Kim wrote:
> >> We resolved the issue using ZONE_EXMEM by allowing seletively choice of the two usecases.
> >
> >This sounds dangerously confused.  Do you want the EXMEM to be removable
> >or not?  If you do, then allocations from it have to be movable.  If
> >you don't, why go to all this trouble?
> 
> I'm sorry to make you confused. We will try more to clearly explain our thought.
> We think the CXL DRAM device should be removable along with HW pluggable nature.
> For MM point of view, we think a page of CXL DRAM can be both movable and unmovable. 
> An user or kernel context should be able to determine it. Thus, we think dedication on the ZONE_NORMAL or the ZONE_MOVABLE is not enough.

No, this is not the right approach.  If CXL is to be hot-pluggable,
then all CXL allocations must be movable.  If even one allocation on a
device is not movable, then the device cannot be removed.  ZONE_EXMEM
feels like a solution in search of a problem.



[Index of Archives]     [Linux Ext4 Filesystem]     [Union Filesystem]     [Filesystem Testing]     [Ceph Users]     [Ecryptfs]     [NTFS 3]     [AutoFS]     [Kernel Newbies]     [Share Photos]     [Security]     [Netfilter]     [Bugtraq]     [Yosemite News]     [MIPS Linux]     [ARM Linux]     [Linux Security]     [Linux Cachefs]     [Reiser Filesystem]     [Linux RAID]     [NTFS 3]     [Samba]     [Device Mapper]     [CEPH Development]

  Powered by Linux