[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.64.0802121653460.11628@schroedinger.engr.sgi.com>
Date: Tue, 12 Feb 2008 16:56:45 -0800 (PST)
From: Christoph Lameter <clameter@....com>
To: Roland Dreier <rdreier@...co.com>
cc: Steve Wise <swise@...ngridcomputing.com>,
Rik van Riel <riel@...hat.com>,
Andrea Arcangeli <andrea@...ranet.com>, a.p.zijlstra@...llo.nl,
izike@...ranet.com, steiner@....com, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
avi@...ranet.com, linux-mm@...ck.org, daniel.blueman@...drics.com,
Robin Holt <holt@....com>, general@...ts.openfabrics.org,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
kvm-devel@...ts.sourceforge.net
Subject: Re: [ofa-general] Re: Demand paging for memory regions
On Tue, 12 Feb 2008, Roland Dreier wrote:
> I don't know anything about the T3 internals, but it's not clear that
> you could do this without a new chip design in general. Lot's of RDMA
> devices were designed expecting that when a packet arrives, the HW can
> look up the bus address for a given memory region/offset and place the
> packet immediately. It seems like a major change to be able to
> generate a "page fault" interrupt when a page isn't present, or even
> just wait to scatter some data until the host finishes updating page
> tables when the HW needs the translation.
Well if the VM wants to invalidate a page then the remote end first has to
remove its mapping.
If a page has been removed then the remote end would encounter a fault and
then would have to wait for the local end to reestablish its mapping
before proceeding.
So the packet would only be generated when both ends are in sync.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists