[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Date: Mon, 8 Aug 2016 06:11:26 -0700
From: Christoph Hellwig <hch@...radead.org>
To: "Boylston, Brian" <brian.boylston@....com>
Cc: Jan Kara <jack@...e.cz>, Dave Chinner <david@...morbit.com>,
"Kani, Toshimitsu" <toshi.kani@....com>,
"linux-nvdimm@...ts.01.org" <linux-nvdimm@...1.01.org>,
"xfs@....sgi.com" <xfs@....sgi.com>,
"linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org>,
"linux-ext4@...r.kernel.org" <linux-ext4@...r.kernel.org>,
Ross Zwisler <ross.zwisler@...ux.intel.com>
Subject: Re: Subtle races between DAX mmap fault and write path
On Mon, Aug 08, 2016 at 12:30:18PM +0000, Boylston, Brian wrote:
> I used NVML 1.1 for the measurements. In this version and with the hardware
> that I used, the pmem_persist() flow is:
Please don't use crap like NVML, given that the people behind it don't
seem to understand persistency at all.
> Perhaps you mean pmem_msync() here? pmem_msync() calls msync(), but
> pmem_persist() does not.
pmem_persist is misnamed then, don't use it.
> > At which point
> > you've lost most of the advantages using movnt. Ross researches into
> > possibilities of allowing more efficient userspace implementation but
> > currently there are none.
>
> Apart from the current performance discussion, if the metadata for a file
> is already established (file created, space allocated by explicit writes(),
> and everything synced), then if I map it and do pmem_memcpy_persist(),
> are there any "ongoing" metadata updates that would need to be flushed
> (besides timestamps)?
Yes. For example because every write might mean a new space allocating
if using reflinks or a COW file system.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-ext4" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Powered by blists - more mailing lists