From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail-pg0-f71.google.com (mail-pg0-f71.google.com [74.125.83.71]) by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 355266B0038 for ; Wed, 30 Nov 2016 06:46:21 -0500 (EST) Received: by mail-pg0-f71.google.com with SMTP id g186so17907274pgc.2 for ; Wed, 30 Nov 2016 03:46:21 -0800 (PST) Received: from mx0a-001b2d01.pphosted.com (mx0a-001b2d01.pphosted.com. [148.163.156.1]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id 12si64050267pfi.251.2016.11.30.03.46.20 for (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Wed, 30 Nov 2016 03:46:20 -0800 (PST) Received: from pps.filterd (m0098404.ppops.net [127.0.0.1]) by mx0a-001b2d01.pphosted.com (8.16.0.17/8.16.0.17) with SMTP id uAUBj0AY139663 for ; Wed, 30 Nov 2016 06:46:19 -0500 Received: from e23smtp06.au.ibm.com (e23smtp06.au.ibm.com [202.81.31.148]) by mx0a-001b2d01.pphosted.com with ESMTP id 271u5626c3-1 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NOT) for ; Wed, 30 Nov 2016 06:46:19 -0500 Received: from localhost by e23smtp06.au.ibm.com with IBM ESMTP SMTP Gateway: Authorized Use Only! Violators will be prosecuted for from ; Wed, 30 Nov 2016 21:46:17 +1000 Received: from d23relay07.au.ibm.com (d23relay07.au.ibm.com [9.190.26.37]) by d23dlp02.au.ibm.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 28E972BB0055 for ; Wed, 30 Nov 2016 22:46:14 +1100 (EST) Received: from d23av03.au.ibm.com (d23av03.au.ibm.com [9.190.234.97]) by d23relay07.au.ibm.com (8.14.9/8.14.9/NCO v10.0) with ESMTP id uAUBkDn829819114 for ; Wed, 30 Nov 2016 22:46:13 +1100 Received: from d23av03.au.ibm.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by d23av03.au.ibm.com (8.14.4/8.14.4/NCO v10.0 AVout) with ESMTP id uAUBkDao024952 for ; Wed, 30 Nov 2016 22:46:13 +1100 Subject: Re: [RFC 1/4] mm: Define coherent device memory node References: <1479824388-30446-1-git-send-email-khandual@linux.vnet.ibm.com> <1479824388-30446-2-git-send-email-khandual@linux.vnet.ibm.com> <692074f0-184f-e506-40a1-8fc078d1e706@intel.com> From: Anshuman Khandual Date: Wed, 30 Nov 2016 17:16:04 +0530 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <692074f0-184f-e506-40a1-8fc078d1e706@intel.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-Id: <583EBBFC.7090700@linux.vnet.ibm.com> Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org List-ID: To: Dave Hansen , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-mm@kvack.org Cc: mhocko@suse.com, vbabka@suse.cz, mgorman@suse.de, minchan@kernel.org, aneesh.kumar@linux.vnet.ibm.com, bsingharora@gmail.com, srikar@linux.vnet.ibm.com, haren@linux.vnet.ibm.com, jglisse@redhat.com On 11/29/2016 11:27 PM, Dave Hansen wrote: > On 11/22/2016 06:19 AM, Anshuman Khandual wrote: >> @@ -393,6 +393,9 @@ enum node_states { >> N_MEMORY = N_HIGH_MEMORY, >> #endif >> N_CPU, /* The node has one or more cpus */ >> +#ifdef CONFIG_COHERENT_DEVICE >> + N_COHERENT_DEVICE, >> +#endif >> NR_NODE_STATES >> }; > > Don't we really want this to be N_MEMORY_ISOLATED? Or, better yet, Sure, If we move from a CDM description to a purely node isolation one. I am still thinking through this. > N_MEMORY_UNISOLATED so that we can just drop the bitmap in for N_MEMORY Did not get that, N_MEMORY_UNISOLATED for the system RAM nodes which are not isolated ? Then where the isolated/CDM nodes go in ? > and not have to do any bit manipulation operations at runtime. > -- To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in the body to majordomo@kvack.org. For more info on Linux MM, see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ . Don't email: email@kvack.org From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1756750AbcK3Lqb (ORCPT ); Wed, 30 Nov 2016 06:46:31 -0500 Received: from mx0b-001b2d01.pphosted.com ([148.163.158.5]:36524 "EHLO mx0a-001b2d01.pphosted.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-FAIL) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1755187AbcK3LqV (ORCPT ); Wed, 30 Nov 2016 06:46:21 -0500 Subject: Re: [RFC 1/4] mm: Define coherent device memory node To: Dave Hansen , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-mm@kvack.org References: <1479824388-30446-1-git-send-email-khandual@linux.vnet.ibm.com> <1479824388-30446-2-git-send-email-khandual@linux.vnet.ibm.com> <692074f0-184f-e506-40a1-8fc078d1e706@intel.com> Cc: mhocko@suse.com, vbabka@suse.cz, mgorman@suse.de, minchan@kernel.org, aneesh.kumar@linux.vnet.ibm.com, bsingharora@gmail.com, srikar@linux.vnet.ibm.com, haren@linux.vnet.ibm.com, jglisse@redhat.com From: Anshuman Khandual Date: Wed, 30 Nov 2016 17:16:04 +0530 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:38.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/38.1.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <692074f0-184f-e506-40a1-8fc078d1e706@intel.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-TM-AS-MML: disable X-Content-Scanned: Fidelis XPS MAILER x-cbid: 16113011-0008-0000-0000-000000EBBC44 X-IBM-AV-DETECTION: SAVI=unused REMOTE=unused XFE=unused x-cbparentid: 16113011-0009-0000-0000-0000089CE9E4 Message-Id: <583EBBFC.7090700@linux.vnet.ibm.com> X-Proofpoint-Virus-Version: vendor=fsecure engine=2.50.10432:,, definitions=2016-11-30_06:,, signatures=0 X-Proofpoint-Spam-Details: rule=outbound_notspam policy=outbound score=0 spamscore=0 suspectscore=0 malwarescore=0 phishscore=0 adultscore=0 bulkscore=0 classifier=spam adjust=0 reason=mlx scancount=1 engine=8.0.1-1609300000 definitions=main-1611300199 Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On 11/29/2016 11:27 PM, Dave Hansen wrote: > On 11/22/2016 06:19 AM, Anshuman Khandual wrote: >> @@ -393,6 +393,9 @@ enum node_states { >> N_MEMORY = N_HIGH_MEMORY, >> #endif >> N_CPU, /* The node has one or more cpus */ >> +#ifdef CONFIG_COHERENT_DEVICE >> + N_COHERENT_DEVICE, >> +#endif >> NR_NODE_STATES >> }; > > Don't we really want this to be N_MEMORY_ISOLATED? Or, better yet, Sure, If we move from a CDM description to a purely node isolation one. I am still thinking through this. > N_MEMORY_UNISOLATED so that we can just drop the bitmap in for N_MEMORY Did not get that, N_MEMORY_UNISOLATED for the system RAM nodes which are not isolated ? Then where the isolated/CDM nodes go in ? > and not have to do any bit manipulation operations at runtime. >