Re: [LSF/MM/BPF TOPIC] CXL Development Discussions

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


On Mon, May 06, 2024 at 01:28:21PM -0700, Dave Jiang wrote:
> On 5/6/24 12:27 PM, Adam Manzanares wrote:
> > Hello all,
> > 
> > I would like to have a discussion with the CXL development community about
> > current outstanding issues and also invite developers interested in RAS and
> > memory tiering to participate.
> > 
> > The first topic I believe we should discuss is how we can ensure as a group
> > that we are prioritizing upstream work. On a recent upstream CXL development
> > discussion call there was a call to review more work. I apologize for not
> > grabbing the link, but I believe Dave Jiang is leveraging patchwork and this
> > link should be shared with others so we can help get more reviews where needed.
> Bundle for the potential fixes
> Bundle for the next merge window
> Just be aware patchwork only takes patches, so the bundle are registered with the first patch of a series. The listing does display the origin series.

Thanks Dave, much appreciated. We will leverage this and I will spread the
message about how important it is to review.

> DJ
> > 
> > The second topic I would like to discuss is how we integrate RAS features that
> > have similar equivalents in the kernel. A CXL device can provide info about 
> > memory media errors in a similar fashion to memory controllers that have EDAC
> > support. Discussions have been put on the list and I would like to hear thoughts
> > from the community about where this should go [1]. On the same topic CXL has 
> > port level RAS features and the PCIe DW series touched on this issue  [2]
> > 
> > The third topic I would like to discuss is how we can get a set of common
> > benchmarks for memory tiering evaluations. Our team has done some initial
> > work in this space, but we want to hear more from end users about their 
> > workloads of concern. There was a proposal related to this topic, but from what 
> > I understand no meeting has been held [3]. 
> > 
> > The last topic that I believe is worth discussion is how do we come up with
> > a baseline for testing. I am aware of 3 efforts that could be used cxl_test, 
> > qemu, and uunit testing framework [4].
> > 
> > Apologies for getting this out late, and please include anyone that may be
> > interested in joining a discussion.
> > 
> > [1]
> > [2]
> > [3]
> > [4]

[Index of Archives]     [DMA Engine]     [Linux Coverity]     [Linux USB]     [Video for Linux]     [Linux Audio Users]     [Yosemite News]     [Linux Kernel]     [Linux SCSI]     [Greybus]

  Powered by Linux