WiP PVM working-set#531
Draft
zdave-parity wants to merge 1 commit into
Draft
Conversation
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
1 participant
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Incomplete draft of Jan's proposed PVM working-set mechanism. I've not yet updated the host calls section, working on that now. I think the other bits are pretty much complete.
One thing I'm not sure about is how to handle the working-set size for accumulation. I've currently got that in the service state (presumably would be updated by
upgrade, this is not done yet). The reason for this is that it is needed for transfers as well as for accumulation of work-items. It would seem very awkward to require a working-set size to be specified intransfer, and if we did do something like that we would need some way to determine a single working-set size for an accumulate call which handles multiple transfers/work-items.