Re: [LSF/MM/BPF BoF] Session for CXL memory

[Zhu Yanjun <yanjun.zhu@linux.dev>]

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.

>