Re: [LSF/MM/BPF BoF] Session for CXL memory

[Davidlohr Bueso <dave@stgolabs.net>]

On Sun, 22 Jan 2023, David Rientjes wrote:

>On Fri, 6 Jan 2023, Viacheslav A.Dubeyko wrote:
>
>> CC: LSF/MM/BPF mailing list. Sorry, missed the list.
>>
>> > On Jan 6, 2023, at 11:51 AM, Viacheslav A.Dubeyko <viacheslav.dubeyko@bytedance.com> wrote:
>> >
>> > Hello,
>> >
>> > I believe CXL memory is hot topic now. I believe we have multiple topics
>> > for discussion. I personally would like to discuss CXL Fabric Manager
>> > and vision of FM architecture implementation. I am going to share the topic
>> > in separate email. I would like to suggest a special session for CXL memory
>> > related topics.
>> >
>> > How everybody feels about it?
>> >
>
>I think this makes a lot of sense, thanks for suggesting it.

Yeah, considering all the CXL interest in last year's lsfmm, I think it would
be good to have a session.

>Should this be a BoF or just a normal topic proposal?  I assume that there
>could be several different topics of interest all related to CXL.mem.

fwiw last year there were 4-5 talks that directly touched on CXL (like half
day).

>Specifically interesting would be the division of work between the kernel
>and userspace to manage memory placement on systems with locally attached
>CXL.  And, further, what APIs userspace would have at its disposal for
>explicit optimization of this placement that would exist beyond what is
>available for NUMA.

+1

>
>I assume we might also want to chat about CXL 2.0 extensions that would be
>useful, especially for cloud providers.
>
>I'd be happy to join in any of the proposals for these topics, just let me
>know!

Likewise.

Thanks,
Davidlohr