RE: [PATCH 00/10] HMM updates for 5.1

From: "Deucher, Alexander" <Alexander.Deucher@amd.com>
To: Jerome Glisse <jglisse@redhat.com>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Cc: "linux-mm@kvack.org" <linux-mm@kvack.org>,
	"linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
	"Kuehling, Felix" <Felix.Kuehling@amd.com>,
	"Koenig, Christian" <Christian.Koenig@amd.com>,
	Ralph Campbell <rcampbell@nvidia.com>,
	John Hubbard <jhubbard@nvidia.com>,
	Jason Gunthorpe <jgg@mellanox.com>,
	Dan Williams <dan.j.williams@intel.com>
Subject: RE: [PATCH 00/10] HMM updates for 5.1
Date: Tue, 19 Mar 2019 18:51:55 +0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <BN6PR12MB18091EB0297912641666526EF7400@BN6PR12MB1809.namprd12.prod.outlook.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20190319165802.GA3656@redhat.com>

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Jerome Glisse <jglisse@redhat.com>
> Sent: Tuesday, March 19, 2019 12:58 PM
> To: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
> Cc: linux-mm@kvack.org; linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org; Kuehling, Felix
> <Felix.Kuehling@amd.com>; Koenig, Christian
> <Christian.Koenig@amd.com>; Ralph Campbell <rcampbell@nvidia.com>;
> John Hubbard <jhubbard@nvidia.com>; Jason Gunthorpe
> <jgg@mellanox.com>; Dan Williams <dan.j.williams@intel.com>; Deucher,
> Alexander <Alexander.Deucher@amd.com>
> Subject: Re: [PATCH 00/10] HMM updates for 5.1
> 
> On Tue, Mar 19, 2019 at 09:40:07AM -0700, Andrew Morton wrote:
> > On Mon, 18 Mar 2019 13:04:04 -0400 Jerome Glisse <jglisse@redhat.com>
> wrote:
> >
> > > On Wed, Mar 13, 2019 at 09:10:04AM -0700, Andrew Morton wrote:
> > > > On Tue, 12 Mar 2019 21:27:06 -0400 Jerome Glisse
> <jglisse@redhat.com> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > Andrew you will not be pushing this patchset in 5.1 ?
> > > >
> > > > I'd like to.  It sounds like we're converging on a plan.
> > > >
> > > > It would be good to hear more from the driver developers who will
> > > > be consuming these new features - links to patchsets, review
> > > > feedback, etc.  Which individuals should we be asking?  Felix,
> > > > Christian and Jason, perhaps?
> > > >
> > >
> > > So i am guessing you will not send this to Linus ?
> >
> > I was waiting to see how the discussion proceeds.  Was also expecting
> > various changelog updates (at least) - more acks from driver
> > developers, additional pointers to client driver patchsets,
> > description of their readiness, etc.
> 
> nouveau will benefit from this patchset and is already upstream in 5.1 so i am
> not sure what kind of pointer i can give for that, it is already there. amdgpu
> will also benefit from it and is queue up AFAICT. ODP RDMA is the third driver
> and i gave link to the patch that also use the 2 new functions that this
> patchset introduce. Do you want more ?
> 
> I guess i will repost with updated ack as Felix, Jason and few others told me
> they were fine with it.
> 
> >
> > Today I discover that Alex has cherrypicked "mm/hmm: use reference
> > counting for HMM struct" into a tree which is fed into linux-next
> > which rather messes things up from my end and makes it hard to feed a
> > (possibly modified version of) that into Linus.
> 
> :( i did not know the tree they pull that in was fed into next. I will discourage
> them from doing so going forward.
> 

I can drop it.  I included it because it fixes an issue with HMM as used by amdgpu in our current -next tree.  So users testing my drm-next branch will run into the issue without it.  I don't plan to include it the actual -next PR.  What is the recommended way to deal with this?

Alex

> > So I think I'll throw up my hands, drop them all and shall await
> > developments :(
> 
> What more do you want to see ? I can repost with the ack already given and
> the improve commit wording on some of the patch. But from user point of
> view nouveau is already upstream, ODP RDMA depends on this patchset and
> is posted and i have given link to it. amdgpu is queue up. What more do i
> need ?
> 
> Cheers,
> Jérôme