[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20190206204954.GS21860@bombadil.infradead.org>
Date: Wed, 6 Feb 2019 12:49:54 -0800
From: Matthew Wilcox <willy@...radead.org>
To: Doug Ledford <dledford@...hat.com>
Cc: Christopher Lameter <cl@...ux.com>, Jason Gunthorpe <jgg@...pe.ca>,
Jan Kara <jack@...e.cz>, Ira Weiny <ira.weiny@...el.com>,
lsf-pc@...ts.linux-foundation.org, linux-rdma@...r.kernel.org,
linux-mm@...ck.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
John Hubbard <jhubbard@...dia.com>,
Jerome Glisse <jglisse@...hat.com>,
Dan Williams <dan.j.williams@...el.com>,
Dave Chinner <david@...morbit.com>,
Michal Hocko <mhocko@...nel.org>
Subject: Re: [LSF/MM TOPIC] Discuss least bad options for resolving
longterm-GUP usage by RDMA
On Wed, Feb 06, 2019 at 03:47:53PM -0500, Doug Ledford wrote:
> On Wed, 2019-02-06 at 12:41 -0800, Matthew Wilcox wrote:
> > On Wed, Feb 06, 2019 at 03:28:35PM -0500, Doug Ledford wrote:
> > > On Wed, 2019-02-06 at 12:20 -0800, Matthew Wilcox wrote:
> > > > Not hot-unplugging the RDMA device but hot-unplugging an NV-DIMM.
^^^ I think you missed this line ^^^
> You said "now that I think about it, there was a desire to support hot-
> unplug which also needed revoke". For us, hot unplug is done at the
> device level and means all connections must be torn down. So in the
> context of this argument, if people want revoke so DAX can migrate from
> one NV-DIMM to another, ok. But revoke does not help RDMA migrate.
>
> If, instead, you mean that you want to support hot unplug of an NV-DIMM
> that is currently the target of RDMA transfers, then I believe
> Christoph's answer on this is correct. It all boils down to which
> device you are talking about doing the hot unplug on.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists