From: Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@intel.com>
To: Dan Williams <dan.j.williams@intel.com>, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Cc: Dave Jiang <dave.jiang@intel.com>,
Jonathan Cameron <Jonathan.Cameron@huawei.com>,
Keith Busch <keith.busch@intel.com>,
kbuild test robot <lkp@intel.com>,
Andy Shevchenko <andy@infradead.org>,
Borislav Petkov <bp@alien8.de>,
Vishal Verma <vishal.l.verma@intel.com>,
"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@zytor.com>,
x86@kernel.org, Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@linux.intel.com>,
Matthew Wilcox <willy@infradead.org>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>, Len Brown <lenb@kernel.org>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>,
"Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@rjwysocki.net>,
Ard Biesheuvel <ard.biesheuvel@linaro.org>,
Andy Lutomirski <luto@kernel.org>,
Darren Hart <dvhart@infradead.org>,
linux-nvdimm@lists.01.org, linux-efi@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 00/10] EFI Specific Purpose Memory Support
Date: Fri, 7 Jun 2019 12:57:49 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <86a49d1a-678e-5e86-180b-e48326d1bdb5@intel.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <155993563277.3036719.17400338098057706494.stgit@dwillia2-desk3.amr.corp.intel.com>
On 6/7/19 12:27 PM, Dan Williams wrote:
> In support of optionally allowing either application-exclusive and
> core-kernel-mm managed access to differentiated memory, claim
> EFI_MEMORY_SP ranges for exposure as device-dax instances by default.
> Such instances can be directly owned / mapped by a
> platform-topology-aware application. Alternatively, with the new kmem
> facility [4], the administrator has the option to instead designate that
> those memory ranges be hot-added to the core-kernel-mm as a unique
> memory numa-node. In short, allow for the decision about what software
> agent manages specific-purpose memory to be made at runtime.
It's probably worth noting that the reason the memory lands into the
state of being controlled by device-dax by default is that device-dax is
nice. It's actually willing and able to give up ownership of the memory
when we ask. If we added to the core-mm, we'd almost certainly not be
able to get it back reliably.
Anyway, thanks for doing these, and I really hope that the world's
BIOSes actually use this flag. For the series:
Reviewed-by: Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@linux.intel.com>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2019-06-07 19:57 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 23+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2019-06-07 19:27 [PATCH v3 00/10] EFI Specific Purpose Memory Support Dan Williams
2019-06-07 19:27 ` [PATCH v3 01/10] acpi/numa: Establish a new drivers/acpi/numa/ directory Dan Williams
2019-06-10 11:02 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2019-06-07 19:27 ` [PATCH v3 02/10] acpi/numa/hmat: Skip publishing target info for nodes with no online memory Dan Williams
2019-06-07 19:27 ` [PATCH v3 03/10] efi: Enumerate EFI_MEMORY_SP Dan Williams
2019-06-07 19:53 ` Dave Hansen
2019-06-07 20:03 ` Dan Williams
2019-06-07 21:12 ` Dave Hansen
2019-06-07 22:07 ` Dan Williams
2019-06-07 19:27 ` [PATCH v3 04/10] x86, efi: Push EFI_MEMMAP check into leaf routines Dan Williams
2019-06-07 19:27 ` [PATCH v3 05/10] x86, efi: Reserve UEFI 2.8 Specific Purpose Memory for dax Dan Williams
2019-06-07 19:27 ` [PATCH v3 06/10] x86, efi: Add efi_fake_mem support for EFI_MEMORY_SP Dan Williams
2019-06-07 19:27 ` [PATCH v3 07/10] lib/memregion: Uplevel the pmem "region" ida to a global allocator Dan Williams
2019-06-07 20:23 ` Matthew Wilcox
2019-06-21 20:35 ` Dan Williams
2019-08-27 5:48 ` Dan Williams
2019-06-07 19:27 ` [PATCH v3 08/10] device-dax: Add a driver for "hmem" devices Dan Williams
2019-06-07 19:54 ` Dave Hansen
2019-06-07 20:07 ` Dan Williams
2019-06-07 19:28 ` [PATCH v3 09/10] acpi/numa/hmat: Register HMAT at device_initcall level Dan Williams
2019-06-07 19:28 ` [PATCH v3 10/10] acpi/numa/hmat: Register "specific purpose" memory as an "hmem" device Dan Williams
2019-06-07 19:57 ` Dave Hansen [this message]
2019-06-07 20:37 ` [PATCH v3 00/10] EFI Specific Purpose Memory Support Dan Williams
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=86a49d1a-678e-5e86-180b-e48326d1bdb5@intel.com \
--to=dave.hansen@intel.com \
--cc=Jonathan.Cameron@huawei.com \
--cc=andy@infradead.org \
--cc=ard.biesheuvel@linaro.org \
--cc=bp@alien8.de \
--cc=dan.j.williams@intel.com \
--cc=dave.hansen@linux.intel.com \
--cc=dave.jiang@intel.com \
--cc=dvhart@infradead.org \
--cc=hpa@zytor.com \
--cc=keith.busch@intel.com \
--cc=lenb@kernel.org \
--cc=linux-efi@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-nvdimm@lists.01.org \
--cc=lkp@intel.com \
--cc=luto@kernel.org \
--cc=mingo@redhat.com \
--cc=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=rjw@rjwysocki.net \
--cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
--cc=vishal.l.verma@intel.com \
--cc=willy@infradead.org \
--cc=x86@kernel.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).