On Fri, Feb 21, 2025 at 03:15:38PM +, Matthew Auld wrote:
> On 20/02/2025 19:55, Matthew Brost wrote:
> > On Thu, Feb 20, 2025 at 04:59:29PM +0100, Thomas Hellström wrote:
> > > On Thu, 2025-02-20 at 15:53 +, Matthew Auld wrote:
> > > > On 13/02/2025 02:11, Matthew Brost wrote:
> > > > > Mi
On 20/02/2025 19:55, Matthew Brost wrote:
On Thu, Feb 20, 2025 at 04:59:29PM +0100, Thomas Hellström wrote:
On Thu, 2025-02-20 at 15:53 +, Matthew Auld wrote:
On 13/02/2025 02:11, Matthew Brost wrote:
Migration is implemented with range granularity, with VRAM backing
being
a VM private TTM
On Thu, Feb 20, 2025 at 04:59:29PM +0100, Thomas Hellström wrote:
> On Thu, 2025-02-20 at 15:53 +, Matthew Auld wrote:
> > On 13/02/2025 02:11, Matthew Brost wrote:
> > > Migration is implemented with range granularity, with VRAM backing
> > > being
> > > a VM private TTM BO (i.e., shares dma-r
On 13/02/2025 02:11, Matthew Brost wrote:
Migration is implemented with range granularity, with VRAM backing being
a VM private TTM BO (i.e., shares dma-resv with VM). The lifetime of the
TTM BO is limited to when the SVM range is in VRAM (i.e., when a VRAM
SVM range is migrated to SRAM, the TTM
On Thu, 2025-02-20 at 15:53 +, Matthew Auld wrote:
> On 13/02/2025 02:11, Matthew Brost wrote:
> > Migration is implemented with range granularity, with VRAM backing
> > being
> > a VM private TTM BO (i.e., shares dma-resv with VM). The lifetime
> > of the
> > TTM BO is limited to when the SVM
On Wed, Feb 19, 2025 at 11:30:31AM +0100, Thomas Hellström wrote:
> On Wed, 2025-02-12 at 18:11 -0800, Matthew Brost wrote:
> > Migration is implemented with range granularity, with VRAM backing
> > being
> > a VM private TTM BO (i.e., shares dma-resv with VM). The lifetime of
> > the
> > TTM BO is
On Wed, 2025-02-12 at 18:11 -0800, Matthew Brost wrote:
> Migration is implemented with range granularity, with VRAM backing
> being
> a VM private TTM BO (i.e., shares dma-resv with VM). The lifetime of
> the
> TTM BO is limited to when the SVM range is in VRAM (i.e., when a VRAM
> SVM range is mi
On 19-02-2025 08:35, Matthew Brost wrote:
On Wed, Feb 19, 2025 at 08:29:53AM +0530, Ghimiray, Himal Prasad wrote:
On 19-02-2025 03:24, Matthew Brost wrote:
On Thu, Feb 13, 2025 at 11:58:27PM +0530, Ghimiray, Himal Prasad wrote:
On 13-02-2025 07:41, Matthew Brost wrote:
Migration is imp
On Wed, Feb 19, 2025 at 08:29:53AM +0530, Ghimiray, Himal Prasad wrote:
>
>
> On 19-02-2025 03:24, Matthew Brost wrote:
> > On Thu, Feb 13, 2025 at 11:58:27PM +0530, Ghimiray, Himal Prasad wrote:
> > >
> > >
> > > On 13-02-2025 07:41, Matthew Brost wrote:
> > > > Migration is implemented with r
On 19-02-2025 03:24, Matthew Brost wrote:
On Thu, Feb 13, 2025 at 11:58:27PM +0530, Ghimiray, Himal Prasad wrote:
On 13-02-2025 07:41, Matthew Brost wrote:
Migration is implemented with range granularity, with VRAM backing being
a VM private TTM BO (i.e., shares dma-resv with VM). The life
On Thu, Feb 13, 2025 at 11:58:27PM +0530, Ghimiray, Himal Prasad wrote:
>
>
> On 13-02-2025 07:41, Matthew Brost wrote:
> > Migration is implemented with range granularity, with VRAM backing being
> > a VM private TTM BO (i.e., shares dma-resv with VM). The lifetime of the
> > TTM BO is limited t
On 13-02-2025 07:41, Matthew Brost wrote:
Migration is implemented with range granularity, with VRAM backing being
a VM private TTM BO (i.e., shares dma-resv with VM). The lifetime of the
TTM BO is limited to when the SVM range is in VRAM (i.e., when a VRAM
SVM range is migrated to SRAM, the T
Migration is implemented with range granularity, with VRAM backing being
a VM private TTM BO (i.e., shares dma-resv with VM). The lifetime of the
TTM BO is limited to when the SVM range is in VRAM (i.e., when a VRAM
SVM range is migrated to SRAM, the TTM BO is destroyed).
The design choice for usi
13 matches
Mail list logo
