From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail-we0-f173.google.com (mail-we0-f173.google.com [74.125.82.173]) by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D2AC3829AA for ; Tue, 6 May 2014 11:43:38 -0400 (EDT) Received: by mail-we0-f173.google.com with SMTP id u57so2722840wes.32 for ; Tue, 06 May 2014 08:43:38 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mx1.redhat.com (mx1.redhat.com. [209.132.183.28]) by mx.google.com with ESMTP id hi10si4659154wib.54.2014.05.06.08.43.36 for ; Tue, 06 May 2014 08:43:37 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <53690302.5070600@redhat.com> Date: Tue, 06 May 2014 11:42:58 -0400 From: Rik van Riel MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: [RFC] Heterogeneous memory management (mirror process address space on a device mmu). References: <1399038730-25641-1-git-send-email-j.glisse@gmail.com> <20140506102925.GD11096@twins.programming.kicks-ass.net> <20140506150014.GA6731@gmail.com> <20140506153315.GB6731@gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <20140506153315.GB6731@gmail.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org List-ID: To: Jerome Glisse , Linus Torvalds Cc: Peter Zijlstra , linux-mm , Linux Kernel Mailing List , linux-fsdevel , Mel Gorman , "H. Peter Anvin" , Andrew Morton , Linda Wang , Kevin E Martin , Jerome Glisse , Andrea Arcangeli , Johannes Weiner , Larry Woodman , Dave Airlie , Jeff Law , Brendan Conoboy , Joe Donohue , Duncan Poole , Sherry Cheung , Subhash Gutti , John Hubbard , Mark Hairgrove , Lucien Dunning , Cameron Buschardt , Arvind Gopalakrishnan , Haggai Eran , Or Gerlitz , Sagi Grimberg , Shachar Raindel , Liran Liss , Roland Dreier , "Sander, Ben" , "Stoner, Greg" , "Bridgman, John" , "Mantor, Michael" , "Blinzer, Paul" , "Morichetti, Laurent" , "Deucher, Alexander" , "Gabbay, Oded" , Davidlohr Bueso On 05/06/2014 11:33 AM, Jerome Glisse wrote: > So how can i solve the issue at hand. A device that has its own page > table and can not mirror the cpu page table, nor can the device page > table be updated atomicly from the cpu. Yes such device will exist TLB invalidation on very large systems can already take essentially forever. Are we OK with extending that "forever" period for heterogeneous memory management with crappy devices, or is this something we could/should look into improving in the general case? -- All rights reversed -- 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