From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail-io0-f198.google.com (mail-io0-f198.google.com [209.85.223.198]) by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B02F36B0038 for ; Tue, 22 Nov 2016 11:03:20 -0500 (EST) Received: by mail-io0-f198.google.com with SMTP id r101so58291415ioi.3 for ; Tue, 22 Nov 2016 08:03:20 -0800 (PST) Received: from mail-it0-x242.google.com (mail-it0-x242.google.com. [2607:f8b0:4001:c0b::242]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id 134si3558014itw.6.2016.11.22.08.03.19 for (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Tue, 22 Nov 2016 08:03:19 -0800 (PST) Received: by mail-it0-x242.google.com with SMTP id b123so2301632itb.2 for ; Tue, 22 Nov 2016 08:03:19 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: References: <1478271776-1194-1-git-send-email-akash.goel@intel.com> <1478271776-1194-2-git-send-email-akash.goel@intel.com> <20161109112835.kivhola7ux3lw4s6@phenom.ffwll.local> From: Matthew Auld Date: Tue, 22 Nov 2016 16:02:49 +0000 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH 2/2] drm/i915: Make GPU pages movable Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org List-ID: To: Hugh Dickins Cc: Daniel Vetter , Intel Graphics Development , Sourab Gupta , linux-mm@kvack.org, akash.goel@intel.com On 9 November 2016 at 18:36, Hugh Dickins wrote: > On Wed, 9 Nov 2016, Daniel Vetter wrote: >> >> Hi all -mm folks! >> >> Any feedback on these two? It's kinda an intermediate step towards a >> full-blown gemfs, and I think useful for that. Or do we need to go >> directly to our own backing storage thing? Aside from ack/nack from -mm I >> think this is ready for merging. > > I'm currently considering them at last: will report back later. > > Full-blown gemfs does not come in here, of course; but let me > fire a warning shot since you mention it: if it's going to use swap, > then we shall probably have to nak it in favour of continuing to use > infrastructure from mm/shmem.c. I very much understand why you would > love to avoid that dependence, but I doubt it can be safely bypassed. Could you please elaborate on what specifically you don't like about gemfs implementing swap, just to make sure I'm following? Thanks, Matt -- To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in the body to majordomo@kvack.org. For more info on Linux MM, see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ . Don't email: email@kvack.org