Hi Dan,
[snip]
+static int hmem_register_cxl_device(struct device *host, int target_nid,
+ const struct resource *res)
+{
+ if (region_intersects(res->start, resource_size(res), IORESOURCE_MEM,
+ IORES_DESC_CXL) != REGION_DISJOINT)
+ return hmem_register_device(host, target_nid, res);
+
+ return 0;
+}
+
+static int soft_reserve_has_cxl_match(struct device *host, int target_nid,
+ const struct resource *res)
+{
+ if (region_intersects(res->start, resource_size(res), IORESOURCE_MEM,
+ IORES_DESC_CXL) != REGION_DISJOINT) {
+ if (!cxl_region_contains_soft_reserve((struct resource *)res))
+ return 1;
+ }
+
+ return 0;
+}
+
+static void process_defer_work(void *data)
+{
+ struct platform_device *pdev = data;
+ int rc;
+
+ /* relies on cxl_acpi and cxl_pci having had a chance to load */
+ wait_for_device_probe();
+
+ rc = walk_hmem_resources(&pdev->dev, soft_reserve_has_cxl_match);
+
+ if (!rc) {
+ dax_cxl_mode = DAX_CXL_MODE_DROP;
+ dev_dbg(&pdev->dev, "All Soft Reserved ranges claimed by
CXL\n");
+ } else {
+ dax_cxl_mode = DAX_CXL_MODE_REGISTER;
+ dev_warn(&pdev->dev,
+ "Soft Reserved not fully contained in CXL; using
HMEM\n");
+ }
+
+ walk_hmem_resources(&pdev->dev, hmem_register_cxl_device);
I do not think we need to do 2 passes. Just do one
hmem_register_cxl_device() pass that skips a range when
cxl_region_contains_resource() has it covered, otherwise register an
hmem device.
Just want to make sure I'm not misreading this — are we dropping the
all or nothing ownership approach? In v6, if any SR range wasn't fully
covered by CXL, all CXL-intersecting ranges fell back to HMEM. With the
single-pass hmem_register_cxl_device() that skips individually covered
ranges, we would be doing per range decisions..
[snip]
Thanks
Smita
