From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.5 required=3.0 tests=HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS, MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_PASS,USER_AGENT_MUTT autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1B7E3C43381 for ; Wed, 20 Feb 2019 23:36:30 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id DE4932146E for ; Wed, 20 Feb 2019 23:36:29 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1726773AbfBTXg2 (ORCPT ); Wed, 20 Feb 2019 18:36:28 -0500 Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([209.132.183.28]:44938 "EHLO mx1.redhat.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1726126AbfBTXg2 (ORCPT ); Wed, 20 Feb 2019 18:36:28 -0500 Received: from smtp.corp.redhat.com (int-mx04.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.11.14]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mx1.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id D847D308FC23; Wed, 20 Feb 2019 23:36:27 +0000 (UTC) Received: from redhat.com (ovpn-120-249.rdu2.redhat.com [10.10.120.249]) by smtp.corp.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 6F8F75D9D2; Wed, 20 Feb 2019 23:36:26 +0000 (UTC) Date: Wed, 20 Feb 2019 18:36:23 -0500 From: Jerome Glisse To: John Hubbard Cc: linux-mm@kvack.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Andrew Morton , Felix Kuehling , Christian =?iso-8859-1?Q?K=F6nig?= , Ralph Campbell , Jason Gunthorpe , Dan Williams Subject: Re: [PATCH 00/10] HMM updates for 5.1 Message-ID: <20190220233623.GC11325@redhat.com> References: <20190129165428.3931-1-jglisse@redhat.com> <0dbf7e99-7db4-4d8b-ecca-60893c83a2a9@nvidia.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit In-Reply-To: <0dbf7e99-7db4-4d8b-ecca-60893c83a2a9@nvidia.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.10.1 (2018-07-13) X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 2.79 on 10.5.11.14 X-Greylist: Sender IP whitelisted, not delayed by milter-greylist-4.5.16 (mx1.redhat.com [10.5.110.43]); Wed, 20 Feb 2019 23:36:28 +0000 (UTC) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Wed, Feb 20, 2019 at 03:17:58PM -0800, John Hubbard wrote: > On 1/29/19 8:54 AM, jglisse@redhat.com wrote: > > From: Jérôme Glisse > > > > This patchset improves the HMM driver API and add support for hugetlbfs > > and DAX mirroring. The improvement motivation was to make the ODP to HMM > > conversion easier [1]. Because we have nouveau bits schedule for 5.1 and > > to avoid any multi-tree synchronization this patchset adds few lines of > > inline function that wrap the existing HMM driver API to the improved > > API. The nouveau driver was tested before and after this patchset and it > > builds and works on both case so there is no merging issue [2]. The > > nouveau bit are queue up for 5.1 so this is why i added those inline. > > > > If this get merge in 5.1 the plans is to merge the HMM to ODP in 5.2 or > > 5.3 if testing shows any issues (so far no issues has been found with > > limited testing but Mellanox will be running heavier testing for longer > > time). > > > > To avoid spamming mm i would like to not cc mm on ODP or nouveau patches, > > however if people prefer to see those on mm mailing list then i can keep > > it cced. > > > > This is also what i intend to use as a base for AMD and Intel patches > > (v2 with more thing of some rfc which were already posted in the past). > > > > Hi Jerome, > > Although Ralph has been testing and looking at this patchset, I just now > noticed that there hasn't been much public review of it, so I'm doing > a bit of that now. I don't think it's *quite* too late, because we're > still not at the 5.1 merge window...sorry for taking so long to get to > this. > > Ralph, you might want to add ACKs or Tested-by's to some of these > patches (or even Reviewed-by, if you went that deep, which I suspect you > did in some cases), according to what you feel comfortable with? More eyes are always welcome, i tested with nouveau and with infinibanb mlx5. It seemed to work properly in my testing but i might have miss- something. Cheers, Jérôme