... > > > > >> > >>>> > >>>> Just like you we feel what's most important is to have DOE supported so > >>>> that > >>>> UEFI and Linux kernel and drivers can progress. We're also contributing > >>>> to > >>>> writing compliance tests for the CXL Compliance Software Development WG. > >>>> > >>> > >>> Great. > >> > >> Is anyone doing the kernel enabling for it? > > > > Planning to look at this but plenty of other things on my todo list if > > someone > > else gets to it first. > > > > Generic DOE support should be straight forward (the infrastructure). > > Parsing CDAT also straight forward. > > Doing something with the results is hard unless we just provide an > > interface for > > userspace to query them for a given device - or dump the table > > (I think we do want to be able to that). > > > > What I'm really not sure on is how to handle NUMA domains that are created > > late > > in the kernel boot sequence. The ACPI flow is set up with the assumption > > that we can get them from SRAT very early in boot. Need to figure out how to > > work around that. (e.g. preallocate a bunch of spare nodes for example > > though that's > > ugly). Note IIRC the kernel doesn't do runtime update of any of the ACPI > > performance parameters yet (_SLI, _HMA) so there probably isn't any > > infrastructure > > that we can reuse. > > > > There is also the firmware based enumeration and description option (OS not > > necessarily > > aware of CXL) in which this is all up to EDK2 and the kernel gets it all > > presented > > as standard tables. > > Do we know who’s on this as part of the EDK2 development? It would be great > if they could > address the SRAT/HMAT generation from reading CDAT. EDK2 does address CXL > 1.1 now.
No idea who, if anyone, is looking at this currently. Perhaps ask on the EDK2 list? Jonathan > > > > > As you can perhaps tell from my half done reviews, this week disappeared in > > other things so bit of catch up for me to do next week. > > > > Thanks, > > > > Joanthan > > ...
