linux-kernel - Re: [Linux-nvdimm] [PATCH v2] pmem: Initial version of persistent memory driver

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Thu, 11 Sep 2014 09:31:14 -0700
From:	Dan Williams <dan.j.williams@...el.com>
To:	Boaz Harrosh <boaz@...xistor.com>
Cc:	Boaz Harrosh <openosd@...il.com>,
	Ross Zwisler <ross.zwisler@...ux.intel.com>,
	Jens Axboe <axboe@...nel.dk>,
	Matthew Wilcox <matthew.r.wilcox@...el.com>,
	linux-fsdevel <linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org>,
	"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	linux-nvdimm@...ts.01.org
Subject: Re: [Linux-nvdimm] [PATCH v2] pmem: Initial version of persistent
 memory driver

On Thu, Sep 11, 2014 at 3:45 AM, Boaz Harrosh <boaz@...xistor.com> wrote:
> On 09/11/2014 02:01 AM, Dan Williams wrote:
> <>
>>
>> Imagine you want to deploy a policy like "use half of the memory
>> provided by the dimm in slot3, i.e. the only one with a battery".
>> That sort of thing gets unwieldy in a command line string compared to
>> a description table format that we can update at will.
>>
>
> Actually it is easy to do, why? I do this here in the lab all the time.
> with a "command line" with this code you see here.
>
> [DDR3 NvDIMM which means I need memmap=16G\$32G on Kernel command line.
>  Then: modprobe pmem map=8G@32G,4G@44G,...
>  and so on Just as a simple example where 2/4-3/4 addresses are not used.
>  You can have holes in the middle or what ever you want. This here is just
>  a table in comma-separated format. If we need like flags in future we can
>  extend the format to nn@ss:flags, but I do no have any 3rd column yet]

The point I am getting at is not requiring a priori knowledge of the
physical memory map of a system.  Rather, place holder variables to
enable simple dynamic discovery.

> And again I have in the pipe a dynamic interface added on top of
> the module param one. So it will all be there soon. Without reverting
> the old one.

Why start on step 2 when we haven't got agreement on step 1?
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/