[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20150624120820.GA17542@lst.de>
Date: Wed, 24 Jun 2015 14:08:20 +0200
From: Christoph Hellwig <hch@....de>
To: Richard Weinberger <richard@....at>
Cc: Christoph Hellwig <hch@....de>,
Dan Williams <dan.j.williams@...el.com>, arnd@...db.de,
mingo@...hat.com, bp@...en8.de, hpa@...or.com, tglx@...utronix.de,
ross.zwisler@...ux.intel.com, akpm@...ux-foundation.org,
jgross@...e.com, x86@...nel.org, toshi.kani@...com,
linux-nvdimm@...ts.01.org, benh@...nel.crashing.org,
mcgrof@...e.com, konrad.wilk@...cle.com,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, stefan.bader@...onical.com,
luto@...capital.net, linux-mm@...ck.org, geert@...ux-m68k.org,
ralf@...ux-mips.org, hmh@....eng.br, mpe@...erman.id.au,
tj@...nel.org, paulus@...ba.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v5 6/6] arch, x86: pmem api for ensuring durability of
persistent memory updates
On Tue, Jun 23, 2015 at 12:39:09PM +0200, Richard Weinberger wrote:
> Not sure if I understand this correctly, is the plan to support pmem also on UML?
> At least drivers/block/pmem.c cannot work on UML as it depends on io memory.
>
> Only x86 seems to have ARCH_HAS_NOCACHE_UACCESS, if UML would offer these methods
> what drivers need them? I'm still not sure where it would make sense on UML as
> uaccess on UML means ptrace() between host and guest process.
Ok, that makese snese. Dan, how about just moving the new pmem helpers
from cacheflush.h to a new asm/pmem.h to avoid having them dragged into
the um build?
--
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/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists