On Thu, May 16, 2024 at 10:05:33AM -0700, fan wrote: > On Fri, Apr 19, 2024 at 02:24:36PM -0400, Gregory Price wrote: > > On Thu, Apr 18, 2024 at 04:10:51PM -0700, nifan....@gmail.com wrote: > > > A git tree of this series can be found here (with one extra commit on top > > > for printing out accepted/pending extent list): > > > https://github.com/moking/qemu/tree/dcd-v7 > > > > > > v6->v7: > > > > > > 1. Fixed the dvsec range register issue mentioned in the the cover letter > > > in v6. > > > Only relevant bits are set to mark the device ready (Patch 6). > > > (Jonathan) > > > 2. Moved the if statement in cxl_setup_memory from Patch 6 to Patch 4. > > > (Jonathan) > > > 3. Used MIN instead of if statement to get record_count in Patch 7. > > > (Jonathan) > > > 4. Added "Reviewed-by" tag to Patch 7. > > > 5. Modified cxl_dc_extent_release_dry_run so the updated extent list can > > > be > > > reused in cmd_dcd_release_dyn_cap to simplify the process in Patch 8. > > > (Jørgen) > > > 6. Added comments to indicate further "TODO" items in > > > cmd_dcd_add_dyn_cap_rsp. > > > (Jonathan) > > > 7. Avoided irrelevant code reformat in Patch 8. (Jonathan) > > > 8. Modified QMP interfaces for adding/releasing DC extents to allow > > > passing > > > tags, selection policy, flags in the interface. (Jonathan, Gregory) > > > 9. Redesigned the pending list so extents in the same requests are grouped > > > together. A new data structure is introduced to represent "extent > > > group" > > > in pending list. (Jonathan) > > > 10. Added support in QMP interface for "More" flag. > > > 11. Check "Forced removal" flag for release request and not let it pass > > > through. > > > 12. Removed the dynamic capacity log type from CxlEventLog definition in > > > cxl.json > > > to avoid the side effect it may introduce to inject error to DC event > > > log. > > > (Jonathan) > > > 13. Hard coded the event log type to dynamic capacity event log in QMP > > > interfaces. (Jonathan) > > > 14. Adding space in between "-1]". (Jonathan) > > > 15. Some minor comment fixes. > > > > > > The code is tested with similar setup and has passed similar tests as > > > listed > > > in the cover letter of v5[1] and v6[2]. > > > Also, the code is tested with the latest DCD kernel patchset[3]. > > > > > > [1] Qemu DCD patchset v5: > > > https://lore.kernel.org/linux-cxl/20240304194331.1586191-1-nifan....@gmail.com/T/#t > > > [2] Qemu DCD patchset v6: > > > https://lore.kernel.org/linux-cxl/20240325190339.696686-1-nifan....@gmail.com/T/#t > > > [3] DCD kernel patches: > > > https://lore.kernel.org/linux-cxl/20240324-dcd-type2-upstream-v1-0-b7b00d623...@intel.com/T/#m11c571e21c4fe17c7d04ec5c2c7bc7cbf2cd07e3 > > > > > > > added review to all patches, will hopefully be able to add a Tested-by > > tag early next week, along with a v1 RFC for MHD bit-tracking. > > > > We've been testing v5/v6 for a bit, so I expect as soon as we get the > > MHD code ported over to v7 i'll ship a tested-by tag pretty quick. > > > > The super-set release will complicate a few things but this doesn't > > look like a blocker on our end, just a change to how we track bits in a > > shared bit/bytemap. > > > > Hi Gregory, > I am planning to address all the concerns in this series and send out v8 > next week. Jonathan mentioned you have few related patches built on top > of this series, can you point me to the latest version so I can look > into it? Also, would you like me to carry them over to send together > with my series in next version? It could be easier for you to avoid the > potential rebase needed for your patches? > > Let me know. > > Thanks, > Fan >
I apologize for missing this, I was out of the country for a few weeks. I'm still catching up on the work history. I think i saw in passing that you picked up the CCI changes, and those were the ones causing conflicts - so that's perfect. I can always rebase on that. ~ Gregory
