[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <fd0a07ce-523d-4755-8caf-4fe48ba954ba@amd.com>
Date: Thu, 16 Oct 2025 15:10:06 +0530
From: "Garg, Shivank" <shivankg@....com>
To: Jonathan Cameron <jonathan.cameron@...wei.com>, lorenzo.stoakes@...cle.com
Cc: akpm@...ux-foundation.org, david@...hat.com, ziy@...dia.com,
willy@...radead.org, matthew.brost@...el.com, joshua.hahnjy@...il.com,
rakie.kim@...com, byungchul@...com, gourry@...rry.net,
ying.huang@...ux.alibaba.com, apopple@...dia.com, Liam.Howlett@...cle.com,
vbabka@...e.cz, rppt@...nel.org, surenb@...gle.com, mhocko@...e.com,
vkoul@...nel.org, lucas.demarchi@...el.com, rdunlap@...radead.org,
jgg@...pe.ca, kuba@...nel.org, justonli@...omium.org, ivecera@...hat.com,
dave.jiang@...el.com, dan.j.williams@...el.com, rientjes@...gle.com,
Raghavendra.KodsaraThimmappa@....com, bharata@....com,
alirad.malek@...corp.com, yiannis@...corp.com, weixugc@...gle.com,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-mm@...ck.org
Subject: Re: [RFC V3 5/9] mm: add support for copy offload for folio Migration
On 10/2/2025 4:40 PM, Jonathan Cameron wrote:
> Ultimately feels like more complexity will be needed to deal with
> multiple providers of copying facilities being available, but I guess
> this works for now.
I agree. The current design is simple to keep the implementation clean and focused.
Depending on usecases, if there is need to support multiple concurrent migrators,
we will need to revisit this design and implement a more dynamic selection mechanism.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists