* Re: [LSF/MM/BPF BoF] Session for CXL memory
2023-01-23 5:51 ` David Rientjes
@ 2023-01-23 15:57 ` Davidlohr Bueso
2023-01-23 16:08 ` Duen-wen Hsiao
` (3 subsequent siblings)
4 siblings, 0 replies; 26+ messages in thread
From: Davidlohr Bueso @ 2023-01-23 15:57 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: David Rientjes
Cc: Viacheslav A.Dubeyko, lsf-pc, linux-cxl, linux-mm, Dan Williams,
Jonathan Cameron, Adam Manzanares, Duen-wen Hsiao,
Johannes Weiner
On Sun, 22 Jan 2023, David Rientjes wrote:
>On Fri, 6 Jan 2023, Viacheslav A.Dubeyko wrote:
>
>> CC: LSF/MM/BPF mailing list. Sorry, missed the list.
>>
>> > On Jan 6, 2023, at 11:51 AM, Viacheslav A.Dubeyko <viacheslav.dubeyko@bytedance.com> wrote:
>> >
>> > Hello,
>> >
>> > I believe CXL memory is hot topic now. I believe we have multiple topics
>> > for discussion. I personally would like to discuss CXL Fabric Manager
>> > and vision of FM architecture implementation. I am going to share the topic
>> > in separate email. I would like to suggest a special session for CXL memory
>> > related topics.
>> >
>> > How everybody feels about it?
>> >
>
>I think this makes a lot of sense, thanks for suggesting it.
Yeah, considering all the CXL interest in last year's lsfmm, I think it would
be good to have a session.
>Should this be a BoF or just a normal topic proposal? I assume that there
>could be several different topics of interest all related to CXL.mem.
fwiw last year there were 4-5 talks that directly touched on CXL (like half
day).
>Specifically interesting would be the division of work between the kernel
>and userspace to manage memory placement on systems with locally attached
>CXL. And, further, what APIs userspace would have at its disposal for
>explicit optimization of this placement that would exist beyond what is
>available for NUMA.
+1
>
>I assume we might also want to chat about CXL 2.0 extensions that would be
>useful, especially for cloud providers.
>
>I'd be happy to join in any of the proposals for these topics, just let me
>know!
Likewise.
Thanks,
Davidlohr
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 26+ messages in thread
* Re: [LSF/MM/BPF BoF] Session for CXL memory
2023-01-23 5:51 ` David Rientjes
2023-01-23 15:57 ` Davidlohr Bueso
@ 2023-01-23 16:08 ` Duen-wen Hsiao
2023-01-23 17:46 ` Adam Manzanares
` (2 subsequent siblings)
4 siblings, 0 replies; 26+ messages in thread
From: Duen-wen Hsiao @ 2023-01-23 16:08 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: David Rientjes
Cc: Viacheslav A.Dubeyko, lsf-pc, linux-cxl, linux-mm, Dan Williams,
Jonathan Cameron, Adam Manzanares, Johannes Weiner
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1605 bytes --]
Good morning,
I would also be interested in the discussion as well. Please include me for
the CXL related discussion.
Thanks.
Duen-wen Hsiao
On Sun, Jan 22, 2023 at 9:51 PM David Rientjes <rientjes@google.com> wrote:
> On Fri, 6 Jan 2023, Viacheslav A.Dubeyko wrote:
>
> > CC: LSF/MM/BPF mailing list. Sorry, missed the list.
> >
> > > On Jan 6, 2023, at 11:51 AM, Viacheslav A.Dubeyko <
> viacheslav.dubeyko@bytedance.com> wrote:
> > >
> > > Hello,
> > >
> > > I believe CXL memory is hot topic now. I believe we have multiple
> topics
> > > for discussion. I personally would like to discuss CXL Fabric Manager
> > > and vision of FM architecture implementation. I am going to share the
> topic
> > > in separate email. I would like to suggest a special session for CXL
> memory
> > > related topics.
> > >
> > > How everybody feels about it?
> > >
>
> I think this makes a lot of sense, thanks for suggesting it.
>
> Should this be a BoF or just a normal topic proposal? I assume that there
> could be several different topics of interest all related to CXL.mem.
>
> Specifically interesting would be the division of work between the kernel
> and userspace to manage memory placement on systems with locally attached
> CXL. And, further, what APIs userspace would have at its disposal for
> explicit optimization of this placement that would exist beyond what is
> available for NUMA.
>
> I assume we might also want to chat about CXL 2.0 extensions that would be
> useful, especially for cloud providers.
>
> I'd be happy to join in any of the proposals for these topics, just let me
> know!
>
[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 2222 bytes --]
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 26+ messages in thread
* Re: [LSF/MM/BPF BoF] Session for CXL memory
2023-01-23 5:51 ` David Rientjes
2023-01-23 15:57 ` Davidlohr Bueso
2023-01-23 16:08 ` Duen-wen Hsiao
@ 2023-01-23 17:46 ` Adam Manzanares
2023-01-23 18:29 ` Matthew Wilcox
2023-01-23 18:30 ` [External] " Viacheslav A.Dubeyko
2023-01-23 18:26 ` Viacheslav A.Dubeyko
2023-01-24 0:22 ` Yang Shi
4 siblings, 2 replies; 26+ messages in thread
From: Adam Manzanares @ 2023-01-23 17:46 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: David Rientjes
Cc: Viacheslav A.Dubeyko, lsf-pc, linux-cxl, linux-mm, Dan Williams,
Jonathan Cameron, Duen-wen Hsiao, Johannes Weiner, Fan Ni
On Sun, Jan 22, 2023 at 09:51:19PM -0800, David Rientjes wrote:
> On Fri, 6 Jan 2023, Viacheslav A.Dubeyko wrote:
>
> > CC: LSF/MM/BPF mailing list. Sorry, missed the list.
> >
> > > On Jan 6, 2023, at 11:51 AM, Viacheslav A.Dubeyko <viacheslav.dubeyko@bytedance.com> wrote:
> > >
> > > Hello,
> > >
> > > I believe CXL memory is hot topic now. I believe we have multiple topics
> > > for discussion. I personally would like to discuss CXL Fabric Manager
> > > and vision of FM architecture implementation. I am going to share the topic
> > > in separate email. I would like to suggest a special session for CXL memory
> > > related topics.
> > >
> > > How everybody feels about it?
> > >
>
> I think this makes a lot of sense, thanks for suggesting it.
>
> Should this be a BoF or just a normal topic proposal? I assume that there
> could be several different topics of interest all related to CXL.mem.
>
+1 for a normal topic proposal.
> Specifically interesting would be the division of work between the kernel
> and userspace to manage memory placement on systems with locally attached
> CXL. And, further, what APIs userspace would have at its disposal for
> explicit optimization of this placement that would exist beyond what is
> available for NUMA.
Given virtual hierarchies can exist I think this becomes a very important
topic of discussion. Locally attached CXL is dynamic, and the CXL hierarchy as
well as device characteristics are factors in the performance expectations of
the host.
In addition, I would like to discuss the best way to emulate such topologies.
QEMU is a great tool for functional testing, I am not sure if there are ways
to leverage it in order to emulate performance characteristics of CXL devices
and hierarchies.
>
> I assume we might also want to chat about CXL 2.0 extensions that would be
> useful, especially for cloud providers.
>
The session about DCDs at Plumbers comes to mind here. In addition, I think this
leads into a general discussion of how the dynamic nature of CXL (devices and
topologies) will be heavily dependent on hot add and remove of system memory.
We have some exploratory work in this area and I am cc'ing the relevant people.
> I'd be happy to join in any of the proposals for these topics, just let me
> know!
+1 for me.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 26+ messages in thread
* Re: [LSF/MM/BPF BoF] Session for CXL memory
2023-01-23 17:46 ` Adam Manzanares
@ 2023-01-23 18:29 ` Matthew Wilcox
2023-01-23 18:32 ` [External] " Viacheslav A.Dubeyko
` (2 more replies)
2023-01-23 18:30 ` [External] " Viacheslav A.Dubeyko
1 sibling, 3 replies; 26+ messages in thread
From: Matthew Wilcox @ 2023-01-23 18:29 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Adam Manzanares
Cc: David Rientjes, Viacheslav A.Dubeyko, lsf-pc, linux-cxl,
linux-mm, Dan Williams, Jonathan Cameron, Duen-wen Hsiao,
Johannes Weiner, Fan Ni
On Mon, Jan 23, 2023 at 05:46:00PM +0000, Adam Manzanares wrote:
> The session about DCDs at Plumbers comes to mind here. In addition, I think this
What's a DCD?
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 26+ messages in thread
* Re: [External] [LSF/MM/BPF BoF] Session for CXL memory
2023-01-23 18:29 ` Matthew Wilcox
@ 2023-01-23 18:32 ` Viacheslav A.Dubeyko
2023-01-23 18:38 ` Adam Manzanares
2023-01-23 19:28 ` Gregory Price
2 siblings, 0 replies; 26+ messages in thread
From: Viacheslav A.Dubeyko @ 2023-01-23 18:32 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Matthew Wilcox
Cc: Adam Manzanares, David Rientjes, lsf-pc, linux-cxl, linux-mm,
Dan Williams, Jonathan Cameron, Duen-wen Hsiao, Johannes Weiner,
Fan Ni
> On Jan 23, 2023, at 10:29 AM, Matthew Wilcox <willy@infradead.org> wrote:
>
> On Mon, Jan 23, 2023 at 05:46:00PM +0000, Adam Manzanares wrote:
>> The session about DCDs at Plumbers comes to mind here. In addition, I think this
>
> What's a DCD?
DCD - Dynamic Capacity Device (CXL Specification 3.0)
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 26+ messages in thread
* Re: [LSF/MM/BPF BoF] Session for CXL memory
2023-01-23 18:29 ` Matthew Wilcox
2023-01-23 18:32 ` [External] " Viacheslav A.Dubeyko
@ 2023-01-23 18:38 ` Adam Manzanares
2023-01-23 19:28 ` Gregory Price
2 siblings, 0 replies; 26+ messages in thread
From: Adam Manzanares @ 2023-01-23 18:38 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Matthew Wilcox
Cc: David Rientjes, Viacheslav A.Dubeyko, lsf-pc, linux-cxl,
linux-mm, Dan Williams, Jonathan Cameron, Duen-wen Hsiao,
Johannes Weiner, Fan Ni
On Mon, Jan 23, 2023 at 06:29:52PM +0000, Matthew Wilcox wrote:
> On Mon, Jan 23, 2023 at 05:46:00PM +0000, Adam Manzanares wrote:
> > The session about DCDs at Plumbers comes to mind here. In addition, I think this
>
> What's a DCD?
Dynamic capacity device. Here is the link to the Plumbers talk:
https://lpc.events/event/16/contributions/1252/
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 26+ messages in thread
* RE: [LSF/MM/BPF BoF] Session for CXL memory
2023-01-23 18:29 ` Matthew Wilcox
2023-01-23 18:32 ` [External] " Viacheslav A.Dubeyko
2023-01-23 18:38 ` Adam Manzanares
@ 2023-01-23 19:28 ` Gregory Price
2 siblings, 0 replies; 26+ messages in thread
From: Gregory Price @ 2023-01-23 19:28 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Matthew Wilcox, Adam Manzanares
Cc: David Rientjes, Viacheslav A.Dubeyko, lsf-pc, linux-cxl,
linux-mm, Dan Williams, Jonathan Cameron, Duen-wen Hsiao,
Johannes Weiner, Fan Ni
Dynamic Capacity Device
-----Original Message-----
From: Matthew Wilcox <willy@infradead.org>
Sent: Monday, January 23, 2023 1:30 PM
To: Adam Manzanares <a.manzanares@samsung.com>
Cc: David Rientjes <rientjes@google.com>; Viacheslav A.Dubeyko <viacheslav.dubeyko@bytedance.com>; lsf-pc@lists.linux-foundation.org; linux-cxl@vger.kernel.org; linux-mm@kvack.org; Dan Williams <dan.j.williams@intel.com>; Jonathan Cameron <jonathan.cameron@huawei.com>; Duen-wen Hsiao <duenwen@google.com>; Johannes Weiner <hannes@cmpxchg.org>; Fan Ni <fan.ni@samsung.com>
Subject: Re: [LSF/MM/BPF BoF] Session for CXL memory
On Mon, Jan 23, 2023 at 05:46:00PM +0000, Adam Manzanares wrote:
> The session about DCDs at Plumbers comes to mind here. In addition, I think this
What's a DCD?
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 26+ messages in thread
* Re: [External] [LSF/MM/BPF BoF] Session for CXL memory
2023-01-23 17:46 ` Adam Manzanares
2023-01-23 18:29 ` Matthew Wilcox
@ 2023-01-23 18:30 ` Viacheslav A.Dubeyko
2023-01-26 16:58 ` Adam Manzanares
1 sibling, 1 reply; 26+ messages in thread
From: Viacheslav A.Dubeyko @ 2023-01-23 18:30 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Adam Manzanares
Cc: David Rientjes, lsf-pc, linux-cxl, linux-mm, Dan Williams,
Jonathan Cameron, Duen-wen Hsiao, Johannes Weiner, Fan Ni
> On Jan 23, 2023, at 9:46 AM, Adam Manzanares <a.manzanares@samsung.com> wrote:
>
> On Sun, Jan 22, 2023 at 09:51:19PM -0800, David Rientjes wrote:
>> On Fri, 6 Jan 2023, Viacheslav A.Dubeyko wrote:
>>
>>> CC: LSF/MM/BPF mailing list. Sorry, missed the list.
>>>
>>>> On Jan 6, 2023, at 11:51 AM, Viacheslav A.Dubeyko <viacheslav.dubeyko@bytedance.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Hello,
>>>>
>>>> I believe CXL memory is hot topic now. I believe we have multiple topics
>>>> for discussion. I personally would like to discuss CXL Fabric Manager
>>>> and vision of FM architecture implementation. I am going to share the topic
>>>> in separate email. I would like to suggest a special session for CXL memory
>>>> related topics.
>>>>
>>>> How everybody feels about it?
>>>>
>>
>> I think this makes a lot of sense, thanks for suggesting it.
>>
>> Should this be a BoF or just a normal topic proposal? I assume that there
>> could be several different topics of interest all related to CXL.mem.
>>
>
> +1 for a normal topic proposal.
By the way, Samsung SMDK (memory development kit) suggested memory model
in user-space and kernel memory subsystem modification. I assume that we need
to discuss the memory model and kernel-space modification. So, it could be one of
the CXL related topic. Could we expect that Samsung guys deliver a talk?
Thanks,
Slava.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 26+ messages in thread
* Re: [External] [LSF/MM/BPF BoF] Session for CXL memory
2023-01-23 18:30 ` [External] " Viacheslav A.Dubeyko
@ 2023-01-26 16:58 ` Adam Manzanares
2023-01-26 19:04 ` Viacheslav A.Dubeyko
0 siblings, 1 reply; 26+ messages in thread
From: Adam Manzanares @ 2023-01-26 16:58 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Viacheslav A.Dubeyko
Cc: David Rientjes, lsf-pc, linux-cxl, linux-mm, Dan Williams,
Jonathan Cameron, Duen-wen Hsiao, hannes, Fan Ni, ks0204.kim,
kim1158
On Mon, Jan 23, 2023 at 10:30:34AM -0800, Viacheslav A.Dubeyko wrote:
>
>
> > On Jan 23, 2023, at 9:46 AM, Adam Manzanares <a.manzanares@samsung.com> wrote:
> >
> > On Sun, Jan 22, 2023 at 09:51:19PM -0800, David Rientjes wrote:
> >> On Fri, 6 Jan 2023, Viacheslav A.Dubeyko wrote:
> >>
> >>> CC: LSF/MM/BPF mailing list. Sorry, missed the list.
> >>>
> >>>> On Jan 6, 2023, at 11:51 AM, Viacheslav A.Dubeyko <viacheslav.dubeyko@bytedance.com> wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>> Hello,
> >>>>
> >>>> I believe CXL memory is hot topic now. I believe we have multiple topics
> >>>> for discussion. I personally would like to discuss CXL Fabric Manager
> >>>> and vision of FM architecture implementation. I am going to share the topic
> >>>> in separate email. I would like to suggest a special session for CXL memory
> >>>> related topics.
> >>>>
> >>>> How everybody feels about it?
> >>>>
> >>
> >> I think this makes a lot of sense, thanks for suggesting it.
> >>
> >> Should this be a BoF or just a normal topic proposal? I assume that there
> >> could be several different topics of interest all related to CXL.mem.
> >>
> >
> > +1 for a normal topic proposal.
>
> By the way, Samsung SMDK (memory development kit) suggested memory model
> in user-space and kernel memory subsystem modification. I assume that we need
> to discuss the memory model and kernel-space modification. So, it could be one of
> the CXL related topic. Could we expect that Samsung guys deliver a talk?
+Kyungsan Kim
It is my understanding that Kyungsan, who is the lead for the SMDK project is
interested in sharing with the community some lessons learned from working with
CXL attached memory and a CFP is planned.
>
> Thanks,
> Slava.
>
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 26+ messages in thread
* Re: [External] [LSF/MM/BPF BoF] Session for CXL memory
2023-01-26 16:58 ` Adam Manzanares
@ 2023-01-26 19:04 ` Viacheslav A.Dubeyko
2023-01-29 1:45 ` MTK
0 siblings, 1 reply; 26+ messages in thread
From: Viacheslav A.Dubeyko @ 2023-01-26 19:04 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Adam Manzanares
Cc: David Rientjes, lsf-pc, linux-cxl, linux-mm, Dan Williams,
Jonathan Cameron, Duen-wen Hsiao, hannes, Fan Ni, ks0204.kim,
kim1158
> On Jan 26, 2023, at 8:58 AM, Adam Manzanares <a.manzanares@samsung.com> wrote:
>
> On Mon, Jan 23, 2023 at 10:30:34AM -0800, Viacheslav A.Dubeyko wrote:
>>
>>
>>> On Jan 23, 2023, at 9:46 AM, Adam Manzanares <a.manzanares@samsung.com> wrote:
>>>
>>> On Sun, Jan 22, 2023 at 09:51:19PM -0800, David Rientjes wrote:
>>>> On Fri, 6 Jan 2023, Viacheslav A.Dubeyko wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> CC: LSF/MM/BPF mailing list. Sorry, missed the list.
>>>>>
>>>>>> On Jan 6, 2023, at 11:51 AM, Viacheslav A.Dubeyko <viacheslav.dubeyko@bytedance.com> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Hello,
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I believe CXL memory is hot topic now. I believe we have multiple topics
>>>>>> for discussion. I personally would like to discuss CXL Fabric Manager
>>>>>> and vision of FM architecture implementation. I am going to share the topic
>>>>>> in separate email. I would like to suggest a special session for CXL memory
>>>>>> related topics.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> How everybody feels about it?
>>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> I think this makes a lot of sense, thanks for suggesting it.
>>>>
>>>> Should this be a BoF or just a normal topic proposal? I assume that there
>>>> could be several different topics of interest all related to CXL.mem.
>>>>
>>>
>>> +1 for a normal topic proposal.
>>
>> By the way, Samsung SMDK (memory development kit) suggested memory model
>> in user-space and kernel memory subsystem modification. I assume that we need
>> to discuss the memory model and kernel-space modification. So, it could be one of
>> the CXL related topic. Could we expect that Samsung guys deliver a talk?
>
> +Kyungsan Kim
>
> It is my understanding that Kyungsan, who is the lead for the SMDK project is
> interested in sharing with the community some lessons learned from working with
> CXL attached memory and a CFP is planned.
>
Sounds pretty great for me. :)
Thanks,
Slava.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 26+ messages in thread
* Re: [External] [LSF/MM/BPF BoF] Session for CXL memory
2023-01-26 19:04 ` Viacheslav A.Dubeyko
@ 2023-01-29 1:45 ` MTK
2023-01-29 1:59 ` MTK
2023-01-30 18:08 ` Viacheslav A.Dubeyko
0 siblings, 2 replies; 26+ messages in thread
From: MTK @ 2023-01-29 1:45 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Viacheslav A.Dubeyko, Adam Manzanares
Cc: David Rientjes, lsf-pc, linux-cxl, linux-mm, Dan Williams,
Jonathan Cameron, Duen-wen Hsiao, hannes, Fan Ni, ks0204.kim
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 2649 bytes --]
Thank you Mr. Slava and Adam for introducing our research.
If I was given an opportunity, I would like to share and discuss
- A case of memory tiering solution for CXL memory, Samsung SMDK, which
works across userspace and kernelspace : why and how
- Some lessens learned from Industry while CXL integration
- Proposal for possible Linux MM expansions for CXL memory
Regarding FM topic, I'm also interested in what we should supports for CXL
3.0 and later topology.
All the best
Kyungsan
2023년 1월 27일 (금) 오전 4:05, Viacheslav A.Dubeyko <
viacheslav.dubeyko@bytedance.com>님이 작성:
>
>
> > On Jan 26, 2023, at 8:58 AM, Adam Manzanares <a.manzanares@samsung.com>
> wrote:
> >
> > On Mon, Jan 23, 2023 at 10:30:34AM -0800, Viacheslav A.Dubeyko wrote:
> >>
> >>
> >>> On Jan 23, 2023, at 9:46 AM, Adam Manzanares <a.manzanares@samsung.com>
> wrote:
> >>>
> >>> On Sun, Jan 22, 2023 at 09:51:19PM -0800, David Rientjes wrote:
> >>>> On Fri, 6 Jan 2023, Viacheslav A.Dubeyko wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>>> CC: LSF/MM/BPF mailing list. Sorry, missed the list.
> >>>>>
> >>>>>> On Jan 6, 2023, at 11:51 AM, Viacheslav A.Dubeyko <
> viacheslav.dubeyko@bytedance.com> wrote:
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> Hello,
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> I believe CXL memory is hot topic now. I believe we have multiple
> topics
> >>>>>> for discussion. I personally would like to discuss CXL Fabric
> Manager
> >>>>>> and vision of FM architecture implementation. I am going to share
> the topic
> >>>>>> in separate email. I would like to suggest a special session for
> CXL memory
> >>>>>> related topics.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> How everybody feels about it?
> >>>>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> I think this makes a lot of sense, thanks for suggesting it.
> >>>>
> >>>> Should this be a BoF or just a normal topic proposal? I assume that
> there
> >>>> could be several different topics of interest all related to CXL.mem.
> >>>>
> >>>
> >>> +1 for a normal topic proposal.
> >>
> >> By the way, Samsung SMDK (memory development kit) suggested memory model
> >> in user-space and kernel memory subsystem modification. I assume that
> we need
> >> to discuss the memory model and kernel-space modification. So, it could
> be one of
> >> the CXL related topic. Could we expect that Samsung guys deliver a talk?
> >
> > +Kyungsan Kim
> >
> > It is my understanding that Kyungsan, who is the lead for the SMDK
> project is
> > interested in sharing with the community some lessons learned from
> working with
> > CXL attached memory and a CFP is planned.
> >
>
> Sounds pretty great for me. :)
>
> Thanks,
> Slava.
>
>
[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 4061 bytes --]
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 26+ messages in thread
* Re: [External] [LSF/MM/BPF BoF] Session for CXL memory
2023-01-29 1:45 ` MTK
@ 2023-01-29 1:59 ` MTK
2023-01-30 18:08 ` Viacheslav A.Dubeyko
1 sibling, 0 replies; 26+ messages in thread
From: MTK @ 2023-01-29 1:59 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Viacheslav A.Dubeyko, Adam Manzanares
Cc: David Rientjes, lsf-pc, linux-cxl, linux-mm, Dan Williams,
Jonathan Cameron, Duen-wen Hsiao, hannes, Fan Ni, ks0204.kim
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 2933 bytes --]
I'm sorry, forwarding as plaintext.
On Sun, Jan 29, 2023 at 10:45 AM MTK <kim1158@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Thank you Mr. Slava and Adam for introducing our research.
>
> If I was given an opportunity, I would like to share and discuss
> - A case of memory tiering solution for CXL memory, Samsung SMDK, which
works across userspace and kernelspace : why and how
> - Some lessens learned from Industry while CXL integration
> - Proposal for possible Linux MM expansions for CXL memory
>
> Regarding FM topic, I'm also interested in what we should supports for
CXL 3.0 and later topology.
>
> All the best
> Kyungsan
>
> 2023년 1월 27일 (금) 오전 4:05, Viacheslav A.Dubeyko <
viacheslav.dubeyko@bytedance.com>님이 작성:
>>
>>
>>
>> > On Jan 26, 2023, at 8:58 AM, Adam Manzanares <a.manzanares@samsung.com>
wrote:
>> >
>> > On Mon, Jan 23, 2023 at 10:30:34AM -0800, Viacheslav A.Dubeyko wrote:
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>> On Jan 23, 2023, at 9:46 AM, Adam Manzanares <
a.manzanares@samsung.com> wrote:
>> >>>
>> >>> On Sun, Jan 22, 2023 at 09:51:19PM -0800, David Rientjes wrote:
>> >>>> On Fri, 6 Jan 2023, Viacheslav A.Dubeyko wrote:
>> >>>>
>> >>>>> CC: LSF/MM/BPF mailing list. Sorry, missed the list.
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>>> On Jan 6, 2023, at 11:51 AM, Viacheslav A.Dubeyko <
viacheslav.dubeyko@bytedance.com> wrote:
>> >>>>>>
>> >>>>>> Hello,
>> >>>>>>
>> >>>>>> I believe CXL memory is hot topic now. I believe we have multiple
topics
>> >>>>>> for discussion. I personally would like to discuss CXL Fabric
Manager
>> >>>>>> and vision of FM architecture implementation. I am going to share
the topic
>> >>>>>> in separate email. I would like to suggest a special session for
CXL memory
>> >>>>>> related topics.
>> >>>>>>
>> >>>>>> How everybody feels about it?
>> >>>>>>
>> >>>>
>> >>>> I think this makes a lot of sense, thanks for suggesting it.
>> >>>>
>> >>>> Should this be a BoF or just a normal topic proposal? I assume
that there
>> >>>> could be several different topics of interest all related to
CXL.mem.
>> >>>>
>> >>>
>> >>> +1 for a normal topic proposal.
>> >>
>> >> By the way, Samsung SMDK (memory development kit) suggested memory
model
>> >> in user-space and kernel memory subsystem modification. I assume that
we need
>> >> to discuss the memory model and kernel-space modification. So, it
could be one of
>> >> the CXL related topic. Could we expect that Samsung guys deliver a
talk?
>> >
>> > +Kyungsan Kim
>> >
>> > It is my understanding that Kyungsan, who is the lead for the SMDK
project is
>> > interested in sharing with the community some lessons learned from
working with
>> > CXL attached memory and a CFP is planned.
>> >
>>
>> Sounds pretty great for me. :)
>>
>> Thanks,
>> Slava.
>>
--
------------------------------------------------------------
the person who practices a truth goes toward light.
[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 4178 bytes --]
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 26+ messages in thread
* Re: [External] [LSF/MM/BPF BoF] Session for CXL memory
2023-01-29 1:45 ` MTK
2023-01-29 1:59 ` MTK
@ 2023-01-30 18:08 ` Viacheslav A.Dubeyko
1 sibling, 0 replies; 26+ messages in thread
From: Viacheslav A.Dubeyko @ 2023-01-30 18:08 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: MTK
Cc: Adam Manzanares, David Rientjes, lsf-pc, linux-cxl, linux-mm,
Dan Williams, Jonathan Cameron, Duen-wen Hsiao, Johannes Weiner,
Fan Ni, ks0204.kim
Hi Kyungsan,
> On Jan 28, 2023, at 5:45 PM, MTK <kim1158@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Thank you Mr. Slava and Adam for introducing our research.
>
> If I was given an opportunity, I would like to share and discuss
> - A case of memory tiering solution for CXL memory, Samsung SMDK, which works across userspace and kernelspace : why and how
> - Some lessens learned from Industry while CXL integration
> - Proposal for possible Linux MM expansions for CXL memory
>
> Regarding FM topic, I'm also interested in what we should supports for CXL 3.0 and later topology.
>
Please, send the topic suggestion then. :) You can check LSF/MM/BPF CFP page for guidance.
Thanks,
Slava.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 26+ messages in thread
* Re: [External] [LSF/MM/BPF BoF] Session for CXL memory
2023-01-23 5:51 ` David Rientjes
` (2 preceding siblings ...)
2023-01-23 17:46 ` Adam Manzanares
@ 2023-01-23 18:26 ` Viacheslav A.Dubeyko
2023-01-26 20:42 ` [Lsf-pc] " Dan Williams
2023-01-24 0:22 ` Yang Shi
4 siblings, 1 reply; 26+ messages in thread
From: Viacheslav A.Dubeyko @ 2023-01-23 18:26 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: David Rientjes
Cc: lsf-pc, linux-cxl, linux-mm, Dan Williams, Jonathan Cameron,
Adam Manzanares, Duen-wen Hsiao, Johannes Weiner
> On Jan 22, 2023, at 9:51 PM, David Rientjes <rientjes@google.com> wrote:
>
> On Fri, 6 Jan 2023, Viacheslav A.Dubeyko wrote:
>
>> CC: LSF/MM/BPF mailing list. Sorry, missed the list.
>>
>>> On Jan 6, 2023, at 11:51 AM, Viacheslav A.Dubeyko <viacheslav.dubeyko@bytedance.com> wrote:
>>>
>>> Hello,
>>>
>>> I believe CXL memory is hot topic now. I believe we have multiple topics
>>> for discussion. I personally would like to discuss CXL Fabric Manager
>>> and vision of FM architecture implementation. I am going to share the topic
>>> in separate email. I would like to suggest a special session for CXL memory
>>> related topics.
>>>
>>> How everybody feels about it?
>>>
>
> I think this makes a lot of sense, thanks for suggesting it.
>
> Should this be a BoF or just a normal topic proposal? I assume that there
> could be several different topics of interest all related to CXL.mem.
>
My point is to have a dedicated CXL session where we can discuss
CXL related topics. And we can have likewise session if several CXL
related topics will be suggested. :)
> Specifically interesting would be the division of work between the kernel
> and userspace to manage memory placement on systems with locally attached
> CXL. And, further, what APIs userspace would have at its disposal for
> explicit optimization of this placement that would exist beyond what is
> available for NUMA.
>
Yes, I think this could be important discussion. Because, for example, I am working
on figuring out how functionality can be distributed among user-space, kernel-space,
and firmware for the case of Fabric Manager. And I believe it could be a good topic
that I have in mind.
> I assume we might also want to chat about CXL 2.0 extensions that would be
> useful, especially for cloud providers.
>
What CXL 2.0 extensions would be useful for cloud providers from your point of view?
Thanks,
Slava.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 26+ messages in thread
* Re: [Lsf-pc] [External] [LSF/MM/BPF BoF] Session for CXL memory
2023-01-23 18:26 ` Viacheslav A.Dubeyko
@ 2023-01-26 20:42 ` Dan Williams
0 siblings, 0 replies; 26+ messages in thread
From: Dan Williams @ 2023-01-26 20:42 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Viacheslav A.Dubeyko, David Rientjes
Cc: Duen-wen Hsiao, Johannes Weiner, linux-cxl, linux-mm,
Adam Manzanares, Jonathan Cameron, Dan Williams, lsf-pc
Viacheslav A.Dubeyko wrote:
>
>
> > On Jan 22, 2023, at 9:51 PM, David Rientjes <rientjes@google.com> wrote:
> >
> > On Fri, 6 Jan 2023, Viacheslav A.Dubeyko wrote:
> >
> >> CC: LSF/MM/BPF mailing list. Sorry, missed the list.
> >>
> >>> On Jan 6, 2023, at 11:51 AM, Viacheslav A.Dubeyko <viacheslav.dubeyko@bytedance.com> wrote:
> >>>
> >>> Hello,
> >>>
> >>> I believe CXL memory is hot topic now. I believe we have multiple topics
> >>> for discussion. I personally would like to discuss CXL Fabric Manager
> >>> and vision of FM architecture implementation. I am going to share the topic
> >>> in separate email. I would like to suggest a special session for CXL memory
> >>> related topics.
> >>>
> >>> How everybody feels about it?
> >>>
> >
> > I think this makes a lot of sense, thanks for suggesting it.
> >
> > Should this be a BoF or just a normal topic proposal? I assume that there
> > could be several different topics of interest all related to CXL.mem.
> >
>
> My point is to have a dedicated CXL session where we can discuss
> CXL related topics. And we can have likewise session if several CXL
> related topics will be suggested. :)
It worked well last time to have individual CXL topic proposals that
could later be grouped into multiple sessions by the planning committee.
So yes, as you mention above do send separate mails with the finer
grained CXL topic in the "Subject:" so it does not get lost in the
shuffle.
> > Specifically interesting would be the division of work between the kernel
> > and userspace to manage memory placement on systems with locally attached
> > CXL. And, further, what APIs userspace would have at its disposal for
> > explicit optimization of this placement that would exist beyond what is
> > available for NUMA.
> >
>
> Yes, I think this could be important discussion. Because, for example, I am working
> on figuring out how functionality can be distributed among user-space, kernel-space,
> and firmware for the case of Fabric Manager. And I believe it could be a good topic
> that I have in mind.
>
> > I assume we might also want to chat about CXL 2.0 extensions that would be
> > useful, especially for cloud providers.
> >
>
> What CXL 2.0 extensions would be useful for cloud providers from your point of view?
...or even CXL 3.0 given that specification is released now.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 26+ messages in thread
* Re: [LSF/MM/BPF BoF] Session for CXL memory
2023-01-23 5:51 ` David Rientjes
` (3 preceding siblings ...)
2023-01-23 18:26 ` Viacheslav A.Dubeyko
@ 2023-01-24 0:22 ` Yang Shi
2023-01-24 0:57 ` Wei Xu
2023-02-20 4:55 ` Aneesh Kumar K.V
4 siblings, 2 replies; 26+ messages in thread
From: Yang Shi @ 2023-01-24 0:22 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: David Rientjes
Cc: Viacheslav A.Dubeyko, lsf-pc, linux-cxl, linux-mm, Dan Williams,
Jonathan Cameron, Adam Manzanares, Duen-wen Hsiao,
Johannes Weiner
On Sun, Jan 22, 2023 at 9:51 PM David Rientjes <rientjes@google.com> wrote:
>
> On Fri, 6 Jan 2023, Viacheslav A.Dubeyko wrote:
>
> > CC: LSF/MM/BPF mailing list. Sorry, missed the list.
> >
> > > On Jan 6, 2023, at 11:51 AM, Viacheslav A.Dubeyko <viacheslav.dubeyko@bytedance.com> wrote:
> > >
> > > Hello,
> > >
> > > I believe CXL memory is hot topic now. I believe we have multiple topics
> > > for discussion. I personally would like to discuss CXL Fabric Manager
> > > and vision of FM architecture implementation. I am going to share the topic
> > > in separate email. I would like to suggest a special session for CXL memory
> > > related topics.
> > >
> > > How everybody feels about it?
> > >
>
> I think this makes a lot of sense, thanks for suggesting it.
>
> Should this be a BoF or just a normal topic proposal? I assume that there
> could be several different topics of interest all related to CXL.mem.
>
> Specifically interesting would be the division of work between the kernel
> and userspace to manage memory placement on systems with locally attached
> CXL. And, further, what APIs userspace would have at its disposal for
> explicit optimization of this placement that would exist beyond what is
> available for NUMA.
Yeah, in addition, how CXL hierarchy interacts with memory tiering may
be an interesting topic too.
>
> I assume we might also want to chat about CXL 2.0 extensions that would be
> useful, especially for cloud providers.
>
> I'd be happy to join in any of the proposals for these topics, just let me
> know!
+1 for me.
>
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 26+ messages in thread
* Re: [LSF/MM/BPF BoF] Session for CXL memory
2023-01-24 0:22 ` Yang Shi
@ 2023-01-24 0:57 ` Wei Xu
2023-01-25 15:04 ` Zhu Yanjun
2023-02-20 4:55 ` Aneesh Kumar K.V
1 sibling, 1 reply; 26+ messages in thread
From: Wei Xu @ 2023-01-24 0:57 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Yang Shi
Cc: David Rientjes, Viacheslav A.Dubeyko, lsf-pc, linux-cxl,
linux-mm, Dan Williams, Jonathan Cameron, Adam Manzanares,
Duen-wen Hsiao, Johannes Weiner, Jerome Glisse
On Mon, Jan 23, 2023 at 4:22 PM Yang Shi <shy828301@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> On Sun, Jan 22, 2023 at 9:51 PM David Rientjes <rientjes@google.com> wrote:
> >
> > On Fri, 6 Jan 2023, Viacheslav A.Dubeyko wrote:
> >
> > > CC: LSF/MM/BPF mailing list. Sorry, missed the list.
> > >
> > > > On Jan 6, 2023, at 11:51 AM, Viacheslav A.Dubeyko <viacheslav.dubeyko@bytedance.com> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > Hello,
> > > >
> > > > I believe CXL memory is hot topic now. I believe we have multiple topics
> > > > for discussion. I personally would like to discuss CXL Fabric Manager
> > > > and vision of FM architecture implementation. I am going to share the topic
> > > > in separate email. I would like to suggest a special session for CXL memory
> > > > related topics.
> > > >
> > > > How everybody feels about it?
> > > >
> >
> > I think this makes a lot of sense, thanks for suggesting it.
> >
> > Should this be a BoF or just a normal topic proposal? I assume that there
> > could be several different topics of interest all related to CXL.mem.
> >
> > Specifically interesting would be the division of work between the kernel
> > and userspace to manage memory placement on systems with locally attached
> > CXL. And, further, what APIs userspace would have at its disposal for
> > explicit optimization of this placement that would exist beyond what is
> > available for NUMA.
>
> Yeah, in addition, how CXL hierarchy interacts with memory tiering may
> be an interesting topic too.
>
> >
> > I assume we might also want to chat about CXL 2.0 extensions that would be
> > useful, especially for cloud providers.
> >
> > I'd be happy to join in any of the proposals for these topics, just let me
> > know!
>
> +1 for me.
>
I am also interested in these discussions.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 26+ messages in thread
* Re: [LSF/MM/BPF BoF] Session for CXL memory
2023-01-24 0:57 ` Wei Xu
@ 2023-01-25 15:04 ` Zhu Yanjun
2023-03-31 18:15 ` Dragan Stancevic
0 siblings, 1 reply; 26+ messages in thread
From: Zhu Yanjun @ 2023-01-25 15:04 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Wei Xu, Yang Shi
Cc: David Rientjes, Viacheslav A.Dubeyko, lsf-pc, linux-cxl,
linux-mm, Dan Williams, Jonathan Cameron, Adam Manzanares,
Duen-wen Hsiao, Johannes Weiner, Jerome Glisse
在 2023/1/24 8:57, Wei Xu 写道:
> On Mon, Jan 23, 2023 at 4:22 PM Yang Shi <shy828301@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> On Sun, Jan 22, 2023 at 9:51 PM David Rientjes <rientjes@google.com> wrote:
>>>
>>> On Fri, 6 Jan 2023, Viacheslav A.Dubeyko wrote:
>>>
>>>> CC: LSF/MM/BPF mailing list. Sorry, missed the list.
>>>>
>>>>> On Jan 6, 2023, at 11:51 AM, Viacheslav A.Dubeyko <viacheslav.dubeyko@bytedance.com> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> Hello,
>>>>>
>>>>> I believe CXL memory is hot topic now. I believe we have multiple topics
>>>>> for discussion. I personally would like to discuss CXL Fabric Manager
>>>>> and vision of FM architecture implementation. I am going to share the topic
>>>>> in separate email. I would like to suggest a special session for CXL memory
>>>>> related topics.
>>>>>
>>>>> How everybody feels about it?
>>>>>
>>>
>>> I think this makes a lot of sense, thanks for suggesting it.
>>>
>>> Should this be a BoF or just a normal topic proposal? I assume that there
>>> could be several different topics of interest all related to CXL.mem.
>>>
>>> Specifically interesting would be the division of work between the kernel
>>> and userspace to manage memory placement on systems with locally attached
>>> CXL. And, further, what APIs userspace would have at its disposal for
>>> explicit optimization of this placement that would exist beyond what is
>>> available for NUMA.
>>
>> Yeah, in addition, how CXL hierarchy interacts with memory tiering may
>> be an interesting topic too.
>>
>>>
>>> I assume we might also want to chat about CXL 2.0 extensions that would be
>>> useful, especially for cloud providers.
>>>
>>> I'd be happy to join in any of the proposals for these topics, just let me
>>> know!
>>
>> +1 for me.
>>
>
> I am also interested in these discussions.
+1, I am interested in this.
>
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 26+ messages in thread
* Re: [LSF/MM/BPF BoF] Session for CXL memory
2023-01-25 15:04 ` Zhu Yanjun
@ 2023-03-31 18:15 ` Dragan Stancevic
0 siblings, 0 replies; 26+ messages in thread
From: Dragan Stancevic @ 2023-03-31 18:15 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Zhu Yanjun, Wei Xu, Yang Shi
Cc: David Rientjes, Viacheslav A.Dubeyko, lsf-pc, linux-cxl,
linux-mm, Dan Williams, Jonathan Cameron, Adam Manzanares,
Duen-wen Hsiao, Johannes Weiner, Jerome Glisse
On 1/25/23 09:04, Zhu Yanjun wrote:
> 在 2023/1/24 8:57, Wei Xu 写道:
>> On Mon, Jan 23, 2023 at 4:22 PM Yang Shi <shy828301@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>> On Sun, Jan 22, 2023 at 9:51 PM David Rientjes <rientjes@google.com>
>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> On Fri, 6 Jan 2023, Viacheslav A.Dubeyko wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> CC: LSF/MM/BPF mailing list. Sorry, missed the list.
>>>>>
>>>>>> On Jan 6, 2023, at 11:51 AM, Viacheslav A.Dubeyko
>>>>>> <viacheslav.dubeyko@bytedance.com> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Hello,
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I believe CXL memory is hot topic now. I believe we have multiple
>>>>>> topics
>>>>>> for discussion. I personally would like to discuss CXL Fabric Manager
>>>>>> and vision of FM architecture implementation. I am going to share
>>>>>> the topic
>>>>>> in separate email. I would like to suggest a special session for
>>>>>> CXL memory
>>>>>> related topics.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> How everybody feels about it?
>>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> I think this makes a lot of sense, thanks for suggesting it.
>>>>
>>>> Should this be a BoF or just a normal topic proposal? I assume that
>>>> there
>>>> could be several different topics of interest all related to CXL.mem.
>>>>
>>>> Specifically interesting would be the division of work between the
>>>> kernel
>>>> and userspace to manage memory placement on systems with locally
>>>> attached
>>>> CXL. And, further, what APIs userspace would have at its disposal for
>>>> explicit optimization of this placement that would exist beyond what is
>>>> available for NUMA.
>>>
>>> Yeah, in addition, how CXL hierarchy interacts with memory tiering may
>>> be an interesting topic too.
>>>
>>>>
>>>> I assume we might also want to chat about CXL 2.0 extensions that
>>>> would be
>>>> useful, especially for cloud providers.
>>>>
>>>> I'd be happy to join in any of the proposals for these topics, just
>>>> let me
>>>> know!
>>>
>>> +1 for me.
>>>
>>
>> I am also interested in these discussions.
>
> +1, I am interested in this.
+1, also interested in cloud aspects
--
Peace can only come as a natural consequence
of universal enlightenment -Dr. Nikola Tesla
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 26+ messages in thread
* Re: [LSF/MM/BPF BoF] Session for CXL memory
2023-01-24 0:22 ` Yang Shi
2023-01-24 0:57 ` Wei Xu
@ 2023-02-20 4:55 ` Aneesh Kumar K.V
1 sibling, 0 replies; 26+ messages in thread
From: Aneesh Kumar K.V @ 2023-02-20 4:55 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Yang Shi, David Rientjes
Cc: Viacheslav A.Dubeyko, lsf-pc, linux-cxl, linux-mm, Dan Williams,
Jonathan Cameron, Adam Manzanares, Duen-wen Hsiao,
Johannes Weiner
Yang Shi <shy828301@gmail.com> writes:
> On Sun, Jan 22, 2023 at 9:51 PM David Rientjes <rientjes@google.com> wrote:
>>
>> On Fri, 6 Jan 2023, Viacheslav A.Dubeyko wrote:
>>
>> > CC: LSF/MM/BPF mailing list. Sorry, missed the list.
>> >
>> > > On Jan 6, 2023, at 11:51 AM, Viacheslav A.Dubeyko <viacheslav.dubeyko@bytedance.com> wrote:
>> > >
>> > > Hello,
>> > >
>> > > I believe CXL memory is hot topic now. I believe we have multiple topics
>> > > for discussion. I personally would like to discuss CXL Fabric Manager
>> > > and vision of FM architecture implementation. I am going to share the topic
>> > > in separate email. I would like to suggest a special session for CXL memory
>> > > related topics.
>> > >
>> > > How everybody feels about it?
>> > >
>>
>> I think this makes a lot of sense, thanks for suggesting it.
>>
>> Should this be a BoF or just a normal topic proposal? I assume that there
>> could be several different topics of interest all related to CXL.mem.
>>
>> Specifically interesting would be the division of work between the kernel
>> and userspace to manage memory placement on systems with locally attached
>> CXL. And, further, what APIs userspace would have at its disposal for
>> explicit optimization of this placement that would exist beyond what is
>> available for NUMA.
>
> Yeah, in addition, how CXL hierarchy interacts with memory tiering may
> be an interesting topic too.
>
>>
>> I assume we might also want to chat about CXL 2.0 extensions that would be
>> useful, especially for cloud providers.
>>
>> I'd be happy to join in any of the proposals for these topics, just let me
>> know!
>
> +1 for me.
>
I would also be interested in finding out what we learned about the
device attributes that people want to use for building hierarchy. We
still haven't hooked up HMAT/CDAT to memory tiers. It would be good to
understand and discuss on how we should make progress here.
-aneesh
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 26+ messages in thread