[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <170a89dc-00a7-41c5-9b25-790519adf381@gmx.de>
Date: Wed, 18 Dec 2024 11:28:54 +0100
From: Friedrich Vock <friedrich.vock@....de>
To: Maarten Lankhorst <dev@...khorst.se>, Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>
Cc: Maxime Ripard <mripard@...nel.org>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
intel-xe@...ts.freedesktop.org, dri-devel@...ts.freedesktop.org,
Zefan Li <lizefan.x@...edance.com>, Johannes Weiner <hannes@...xchg.org>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>, cgroups@...r.kernel.org,
linux-mm@...ck.org, Maarten Lankhorst <maarten.lankhorst@...ux.intel.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 0/7] kernel/cgroups: Add "dmem" memory accounting
cgroup.
On 17.12.24 18:37, Maarten Lankhorst wrote:
>
>
> Den 2024-12-17 kl. 18:11, skrev Tejun Heo:
>> On Tue, Dec 17, 2024 at 03:28:50PM +0100, Maarten Lankhorst wrote:
>>> Now that all patches look good, what is needed to merge the series?
>>> Without
>>> patch 6/7 as it is a hack for testing.
>>
>> There were some questions raised about device naming. One thing we
>> want to
>> get right from the beginning is the basic interface.
>>
>> Thanks.
>>
> I believe it was solved. The conclusion appears to be that we go with
> how we defined it in this series. drm/$pciid/$regionname.
Yeah, I'd agree. Using PCI IDs works, and the objection about cardN
syntax being unstable when driver load order changes is a good point.
Friedrich
> With the only
> regions defined now being VRAM. Main memory will be a followup, but
> requires some discussions on hwo to be prevent double accounting, and
> what to do with the limited amount of mappable memory.
>
> Cheers,
> ~Maarten
Powered by blists - more mailing lists