From: Keith Busch <keith.busch@intel.com>
To: Jonathan Cameron <jonathan.cameron@huawei.com>
Cc: "linux-mm@kvack.org" <linux-mm@kvack.org>,
"linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
"linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org" <linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org>,
Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>,
Rafael Wysocki <rafael@kernel.org>,
"Hansen, Dave" <dave.hansen@intel.com>,
"Williams, Dan J" <dan.j.williams@intel.com>,
"linuxarm@huawei.com" <linuxarm@huawei.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCHv5 00/10] Heterogeneuos memory node attributes
Date: Thu, 7 Feb 2019 08:08:17 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20190207150817.GC30221@localhost.localdomain> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20190207095336.0000529f@huawei.com>
On Thu, Feb 07, 2019 at 01:53:36AM -0800, Jonathan Cameron wrote:
> As a general heads up, ACPI 6.3 is out and makes some changes.
> Discussions I've had in the past suggested there were few systems
> shipping with 6.2 HMAT and that many firmwares would start at 6.3.
> Of course, that might not be true, but there was fairly wide participation
> in the meeting so fingers crossed it's accurate.
>
> https://uefi.org/sites/default/files/resources/ACPI_6_3_final_Jan30.pdf
>
> Particular points to note:
> 1. Most of the Memory Proximity Domain Attributes Structure was deprecated.
> This includes the reservation hint which has been replaced
> with a new mechanism (not used in this patch set)
Yes, and duplicating all the address ranges with SRAT never made any
sense. No need to define the same thing in multiple places; that's just
another opprotunity to get it wrong.
> 2. Base units for latency changed to picoseconds. There is a lot more
> explanatory text around how those work.
>
> 3. The measurements of latency and bandwidth no longer have an
> 'aggregate performance' version. Given the work load was not described
> this never made any sense. Better for a knowledgeable bit of software
> to work out it's own estimate.
Nice. Though they shifted 1st level cached to occupy the same value that
the aggregate used. They could have just deprecated the old value so we
could maintain compatibility, but that's okay!
> 4. There are now Generic Initiator Domains that have neither memory nor
> processors. I'll come back with proposals on handling those soon if
> no one beats me to it. (I think it's really easy but may be wrong ;)
> I've not really thought out how this series applies to GI only domains
> yet. Probably not useful to know you have an accelerator near to
> particular memory if you are deciding where to pin your host processor
> task ;)
I haven't any particular use for these at the moment either, though it
shouldn't change what this is going to export.
Thanks for the heads up! I'll incorporate 6.3 into v6.
prev parent reply other threads:[~2019-02-07 15:08 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 37+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2019-01-24 23:07 [PATCHv5 00/10] Heterogeneuos memory node attributes Keith Busch
2019-01-24 23:07 ` [PATCHv5 01/10] acpi: Create subtable parsing infrastructure Keith Busch
2019-01-24 23:07 ` [PATCHv5 02/10] acpi: Add HMAT to generic parsing tables Keith Busch
2019-01-24 23:07 ` [PATCHv5 03/10] acpi/hmat: Parse and report heterogeneous memory Keith Busch
2019-02-05 12:12 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2019-02-06 12:28 ` Jonathan Cameron
2019-02-06 16:06 ` Keith Busch
2019-02-06 16:39 ` Jonathan Cameron
2019-01-24 23:07 ` [PATCHv5 04/10] node: Link memory nodes to their compute nodes Keith Busch
2019-02-05 12:33 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2019-02-05 14:48 ` Keith Busch
2019-02-05 14:52 ` Greg Kroah-Hartman
2019-02-05 15:17 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2019-02-06 23:09 ` Keith Busch
2019-02-06 23:48 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2019-02-06 12:26 ` Jonathan Cameron
2019-02-06 16:12 ` Keith Busch
2019-02-06 16:47 ` Jonathan Cameron
2019-02-07 11:35 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2019-01-24 23:07 ` [PATCHv5 05/10] acpi/hmat: Register processor domain to its memory Keith Busch
2019-02-06 12:26 ` Jonathan Cameron
2019-01-24 23:07 ` [PATCHv5 06/10] node: Add heterogenous memory access attributes Keith Busch
2019-01-24 23:07 ` [PATCHv5 07/10] acpi/hmat: Register performance attributes Keith Busch
2019-02-06 12:24 ` Jonathan Cameron
2019-01-24 23:07 ` [PATCHv5 08/10] node: Add memory caching attributes Keith Busch
2019-02-06 12:24 ` Jonathan Cameron
2019-01-24 23:07 ` [PATCHv5 09/10] acpi/hmat: Register memory side cache attributes Keith Busch
2019-02-06 12:17 ` Jonathan Cameron
2019-01-24 23:07 ` [PATCHv5 10/10] doc/mm: New documentation for memory performance Keith Busch
2019-02-06 10:45 ` Jonathan Cameron
2019-02-06 16:25 ` Keith Busch
2019-01-28 14:00 ` [PATCHv5 00/10] Heterogeneuos memory node attributes Michal Hocko
2019-02-06 12:31 ` Jonathan Cameron
2019-02-06 17:19 ` Keith Busch
2019-02-06 17:30 ` Jonathan Cameron
2019-02-07 9:53 ` Jonathan Cameron
2019-02-07 15:08 ` Keith Busch [this message]
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=20190207150817.GC30221@localhost.localdomain \
--to=keith.busch@intel.com \
--cc=dan.j.williams@intel.com \
--cc=dave.hansen@intel.com \
--cc=gregkh@linuxfoundation.org \
--cc=jonathan.cameron@huawei.com \
--cc=linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
--cc=linuxarm@huawei.com \
--cc=rafael@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).