On Thursday, August 20, 2020 10:15 AM, Ezequiel Garcia <ezequiel@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > I'm rather interested on where this goes, as I was toying with using > > some sort of heap ID as a basis for a "device-local" constraint in the > > memory constraints proposals Simon and I will be discussing at XDC this > > year. It would be rather elegant if there was one type of heap ID used > > universally throughout the kernel that could provide a unique handle for > > the shared system memory heap(s), as well as accelerator-local heaps on > > fancy NICs, GPUs, NN accelerators, capture devices, etc. so apps could > > negotiate a location among themselves. This patch seems to be a step > > towards that in a way, but I agree it would be counterproductive if a > > bunch of devices that were using the same underlying system memory ended > > up each getting their own heap ID just because they used some SW > > framework that worked that way. > > Would appreciate it if you could send along a pointer to your BoF if it > > happens! > > Here is it: > > https://linuxplumbersconf.org/event/7/contributions/818/ > > It would be great to see you there and discuss this, > given I was hoping we could talk about how to meet a > userspace allocator library expectations as well. Unfortunately there's no livestream for BoFs. Would be very interested in having a summary of the discussions once the BoF is over!
