On Thu, Nov 20, 2025 at 07:59:19AM +0000, Tian, Kevin wrote: > > From: Jason Gunthorpe <[email protected]> > > Sent: Saturday, November 8, 2025 12:50 AM > > > > +enum batch_kind { > > + BATCH_CPU_MEMORY = 0, > > + BATCH_MMIO, > > +}; > > with 'CPU_MEMORY' (instead of plain 'MEMORY') implies future > support of 'DEV_MEMORY'?
Maybe, but I don't have an immediate thought on this. CXL "MMIO" that is cachable is a thing but we can also label it as CPU_MEMORY. We might have something for CC shared/protected memory down the road. Thanks, Jason
