Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 2620:137:e000::1:20 as permitted sender) client-ip=2620:137:e000::1:20;
From:   "Huang, Ying" <ying.huang@intel.com>
To:     Bharata B Rao <bharata@amd.com>
Cc:     Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
        Alistair Popple <apopple@nvidia.com>, <linux-mm@kvack.org>,
        <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>, <linux-cxl@vger.kernel.org>,
        <nvdimm@lists.linux.dev>, <linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org>,
        "Aneesh Kumar K . V" <aneesh.kumar@linux.ibm.com>,
        Wei Xu <weixugc@google.com>,
        Dan Williams <dan.j.williams@intel.com>,
        Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@intel.com>,
        "Davidlohr Bueso" <dave@stgolabs.net>,
        Johannes Weiner <hannes@cmpxchg.org>,
        "Jonathan Cameron" <Jonathan.Cameron@huawei.com>,
        Michal Hocko <mhocko@kernel.org>,
        Yang Shi <shy828301@gmail.com>,
        Rafael J Wysocki <rafael.j.wysocki@intel.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH RESEND 0/4] memory tiering: calculate abstract distance
 based on ACPI HMAT
References: <20230721012932.190742-1-ying.huang@intel.com>
        <875y6dj3ok.fsf@nvdebian.thelocal>
        <20230724105818.6f7b10fc8c318ea5aae9e188@linux-foundation.org>
        <6c8ed42d-ea71-c11e-2689-c4fc23845ccf@amd.com>
Date:   Fri, 11 Aug 2023 14:26:17 +0800
In-Reply-To: <6c8ed42d-ea71-c11e-2689-c4fc23845ccf@amd.com> (Bharata B. Rao's
        message of "Tue, 1 Aug 2023 08:05:00 +0530")
Message-ID: <87il9mccxi.fsf@yhuang6-desk2.ccr.corp.intel.com>
User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/28.2 (gnu/linux)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ascii
Precedence: bulk

Hi, Rao,

Bharata B Rao <bharata@amd.com> writes:

> On 24-Jul-23 11:28 PM, Andrew Morton wrote:
>> On Fri, 21 Jul 2023 14:15:31 +1000 Alistair Popple <apopple@nvidia.com> wrote:
>> 
>>> Thanks for this Huang, I had been hoping to take a look at it this week
>>> but have run out of time. I'm keen to do some testing with it as well.
>> 
>> Thanks.  I'll queue this in mm-unstable for some testing.  Detailed
>> review and testing would be appreciated.
>
> I gave this series a try on a 2P system with 2 CXL cards. I don't trust the
> bandwidth and latency numbers reported by HMAT here, but FWIW, this patchset
> puts the CXL nodes on a lower tier than DRAM nodes.

Thank you very much!

Can I add your "Tested-by" for the series?

--
Best Regards,
Huang, Ying