On Thu, Feb 11, 2021 at 01:07:10PM +0100, David Hildenbrand wrote:
> On 11.02.21 12:27, Mike Rapoport wrote:
> > On Thu, Feb 11, 2021 at 10:01:32AM +0100, David Hildenbrand wrote:
>
> So let's talk about the main user-visible differences to other memfd files
> (especially, other purely virtual
On Thu, Feb 11, 2021 at 01:30:42PM +0100, Michal Hocko wrote:
> On Thu 11-02-21 13:20:08, Mike Rapoport wrote:
> [...]
> > Sealing is anyway controlled via fcntl() and I don't think
> > MFD_ALLOW_SEALING makes much sense for the secretmem because it is there to
> > prevent rogue file sealing in
On Thu, Feb 11, 2021 at 2:19 AM Jonathan Cameron
wrote:
>
> On Wed, 10 Feb 2021 18:17:25 +
> Jonathan Cameron wrote:
>
> > On Tue, 9 Feb 2021 16:02:54 -0800
> > Ben Widawsky wrote:
> >
> > > From: Dan Williams
> > >
> > > Create the /sys/bus/cxl hierarchy to enumerate:
> > >
> > > * Memory
On Thu, Feb 11, 2021 at 9:45 AM Ben Widawsky wrote:
[..]
> > > + if (mbox_cmd.size_out > sizeof(gsl)) {
> > > + dev_warn(dev, "%zu excess logs\n",
> > > +(mbox_cmd.size_out - sizeof(gsl)) /
> > > +sizeof(struct gsl_entry));
> >
> > This
On 21-02-11 09:55:48, Jonathan Cameron wrote:
> On Wed, 10 Feb 2021 10:16:05 -0800
> Ben Widawsky wrote:
>
> > On 21-02-10 08:55:57, Ben Widawsky wrote:
> > > On 21-02-10 15:07:59, Jonathan Cameron wrote:
> > > > On Wed, 10 Feb 2021 13:32:52 +
> > > > Jonathan Cameron wrote:
> > > >
>
On 21-02-11 12:02:15, Jonathan Cameron wrote:
> On Tue, 9 Feb 2021 16:02:57 -0800
> Ben Widawsky wrote:
>
> > CXL devices identified by the memory-device class code must implement
> > the Device Command Interface (described in 8.2.9 of the CXL 2.0 spec).
> > While the driver already maintains a
On 21-02-11 10:06:46, Jonathan Cameron wrote:
> On Wed, 10 Feb 2021 20:40:52 -0800
> Dan Williams wrote:
>
> > On Wed, Feb 10, 2021 at 10:47 AM Jonathan Cameron
> > wrote:
> > [..]
> > > > +#define CXL_CMDS
> > > >\
> > > > +
On Wed, Feb 10, 2021 at 7:27 AM wrote:
>
> > diff --git a/drivers/cxl/Kconfig b/drivers/cxl/Kconfig
> > index c4ba3aa0a05d..08eaa8e52083 100644
> > --- a/drivers/cxl/Kconfig
> > +++ b/drivers/cxl/Kconfig
> > @@ -33,6 +33,24 @@ config CXL_MEM
> >
> > If unsure say 'm'.
> >
> > +config
On Thu 11-02-21 13:20:08, Mike Rapoport wrote:
[...]
> Sealing is anyway controlled via fcntl() and I don't think
> MFD_ALLOW_SEALING makes much sense for the secretmem because it is there to
> prevent rogue file sealing in tmpfs/hugetlbfs.
This doesn't really match my understanding. The primary
On 21-02-11 10:01:52, Jonathan Cameron wrote:
> On Wed, 10 Feb 2021 11:54:29 -0800
> Dan Williams wrote:
>
> > > > ...
> > > >
> > > > > +static void cxl_mem_mbox_timeout(struct cxl_mem *cxlm,
> > > > > +struct mbox_cmd *mbox_cmd)
> > > > > +{
> > > > > + struct
On 21-02-11 11:19:24, Jonathan Cameron wrote:
> On Tue, 9 Feb 2021 16:02:56 -0800
> Ben Widawsky wrote:
>
> > The CXL memory device send interface will have a number of supported
> > commands. The raw command is not such a command. Raw commands allow
> > userspace to send a specified opcode to
On 21-02-11 09:55:48, Jonathan Cameron wrote:
> On Wed, 10 Feb 2021 10:16:05 -0800
> Ben Widawsky wrote:
>
> > On 21-02-10 08:55:57, Ben Widawsky wrote:
> > > On 21-02-10 15:07:59, Jonathan Cameron wrote:
> > > > On Wed, 10 Feb 2021 13:32:52 +
> > > > Jonathan Cameron wrote:
> > > >
>
On Thu 11-02-21 10:01:32, David Hildenbrand wrote:
[...]
> AFAIKS, we would need MFD_SECRET and disallow
> MFD_ALLOW_SEALING and MFD_HUGETLB.
Yes for an initial version. But I do expect a request to support both
features is just a matter of time.
> In addition, we could add MFD_SECRET_NEVER_MAP,
On Thu 11-02-21 09:13:19, Mike Rapoport wrote:
> On Tue, Feb 09, 2021 at 02:17:11PM +0100, Michal Hocko wrote:
> > On Tue 09-02-21 11:09:38, Mike Rapoport wrote:
[...]
> > > Citing my older email:
> > >
> > > I've hesitated whether to continue to use new flags to memfd_create()
> > > or to
>
On Tue, 9 Feb 2021 16:02:58 -0800
Ben Widawsky wrote:
> Add initial set of formal commands beyond basic identify and command
> enumeration.
>
> Of special note is the Get Log Command which is only specified to return
> 2 log types, CEL and VENDOR_DEBUG. Given that VENDOR_DEBUG is already a
>
On 11.02.21 12:27, Mike Rapoport wrote:
On Thu, Feb 11, 2021 at 10:01:32AM +0100, David Hildenbrand wrote:
On 11.02.21 09:39, Michal Hocko wrote:
On Thu 11-02-21 09:13:19, Mike Rapoport wrote:
On Tue, Feb 09, 2021 at 02:17:11PM +0100, Michal Hocko wrote:
On Tue 09-02-21 11:09:38, Mike
On Tue, 9 Feb 2021 16:02:57 -0800
Ben Widawsky wrote:
> CXL devices identified by the memory-device class code must implement
> the Device Command Interface (described in 8.2.9 of the CXL 2.0 spec).
> While the driver already maintains a list of commands it supports, there
> is still a need to
On Thu, Feb 11, 2021 at 11:02:07AM +0100, David Hildenbrand wrote:
>
> Another thought regarding "doesn't have _any_ backing storage"
>
> What are the right semantics when it comes to memory accounting/commit?
>
> As secretmem does not have
> a) any backing storage
> b) cannot go to swap
>
>
On Thu, Feb 11, 2021 at 10:01:32AM +0100, David Hildenbrand wrote:
> On 11.02.21 09:39, Michal Hocko wrote:
> > On Thu 11-02-21 09:13:19, Mike Rapoport wrote:
> > > On Tue, Feb 09, 2021 at 02:17:11PM +0100, Michal Hocko wrote:
> > > > On Tue 09-02-21 11:09:38, Mike Rapoport wrote:
> > [...]
> > >
On Tue, 9 Feb 2021 16:02:56 -0800
Ben Widawsky wrote:
> The CXL memory device send interface will have a number of supported
> commands. The raw command is not such a command. Raw commands allow
> userspace to send a specified opcode to the underlying hardware and
> bypass all driver checks on
On Thu, Feb 11, 2021 at 09:39:38AM +0100, Michal Hocko wrote:
> On Thu 11-02-21 09:13:19, Mike Rapoport wrote:
> > On Tue, Feb 09, 2021 at 02:17:11PM +0100, Michal Hocko wrote:
> > > On Tue 09-02-21 11:09:38, Mike Rapoport wrote:
> [...]
> > > > Citing my older email:
> > > >
> > > > I've
On Wed, 10 Feb 2021 18:17:25 +
Jonathan Cameron wrote:
> On Tue, 9 Feb 2021 16:02:54 -0800
> Ben Widawsky wrote:
>
> > From: Dan Williams
> >
> > Create the /sys/bus/cxl hierarchy to enumerate:
> >
> > * Memory Devices (per-endpoint control devices)
> >
> > * Memory Address Space
On Wed, 10 Feb 2021 20:40:52 -0800
Dan Williams wrote:
> On Wed, Feb 10, 2021 at 10:47 AM Jonathan Cameron
> wrote:
> [..]
> > > +#define CXL_CMDS
> > > \
> > > + ___C(INVALID, "Invalid Command"), \
>
On Wed, 10 Feb 2021 11:54:29 -0800
Dan Williams wrote:
> > > ...
> > >
> > > > +static void cxl_mem_mbox_timeout(struct cxl_mem *cxlm,
> > > > +struct mbox_cmd *mbox_cmd)
> > > > +{
> > > > + struct device *dev = >pdev->dev;
> > > > +
> > > > + dev_dbg(dev,
On 11.02.21 10:38, Michal Hocko wrote:
On Thu 11-02-21 10:01:32, David Hildenbrand wrote:
[...]
AFAIKS, we would need MFD_SECRET and disallow
MFD_ALLOW_SEALING and MFD_HUGETLB.
Yes for an initial version. But I do expect a request to support both
features is just a matter of time.
In
On Wed, 10 Feb 2021 10:16:05 -0800
Ben Widawsky wrote:
> On 21-02-10 08:55:57, Ben Widawsky wrote:
> > On 21-02-10 15:07:59, Jonathan Cameron wrote:
> > > On Wed, 10 Feb 2021 13:32:52 +
> > > Jonathan Cameron wrote:
> > >
> > > > On Tue, 9 Feb 2021 16:02:53 -0800
> > > > Ben Widawsky
Some random thoughts regarding files.
What is the page size of secretmem memory? Sometimes we use huge pages,
sometimes we fallback to 4k pages. So I assume huge pages in general?
Unless there is an explicit request for hugetlb I would say the page
size is not really important like for any
On 11.02.21 09:39, Michal Hocko wrote:
On Thu 11-02-21 09:13:19, Mike Rapoport wrote:
On Tue, Feb 09, 2021 at 02:17:11PM +0100, Michal Hocko wrote:
On Tue 09-02-21 11:09:38, Mike Rapoport wrote:
[...]
Citing my older email:
I've hesitated whether to continue to use new flags to
28 matches
Mail list logo
