On Wed, Oct 23, 2024 at 06:22:17PM -0700, Andrew Morton wrote: > On Wed, 23 Oct 2024 16:39:43 -0700 Matthew Brost <matthew.brost@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > Part of series [1]. Sending as individual patch ahead of that series as > > this is a prerequisite for merging. > > That's news to me - singleton patches are perfectly OK? > I've merged a couple of other patches outside of the DRM subsystem for pending series which we then have picked up in a following kernel release. If I have this flow wrong, my mistake. > On Wed, 23 Oct 2024 16:39:44 -0700 Matthew Brost <matthew.brost@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > Implement migrate_device_pfns to prepare an array of PFNs for migration. > > Handles non-contiguous ranges of device pages that require migration. > > OK, that's "what". We're more interested in "why". > Sure can add. The 'why' is: A non-contiguous allocation of device pages can occur if a device is under memory pressure within a single driver allocation of device memory. Additionally, a driver allocation of memory can also be evicted under memory pressure. Therefore, an interface for migrating a set of non-contiguous device pages is required. Matt > > +EXPORT_SYMBOL(migrate_device_pfns); > > And it's exported to modules, which adds to the significance. > > Please fully describe the reasons for proposing this change.
