[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20151028225112.GA30284@linux.intel.com>
Date: Wed, 28 Oct 2015 16:51:12 -0600
From: Ross Zwisler <ross.zwisler@...ux.intel.com>
To: Jeff Moyer <jmoyer@...hat.com>
Cc: Ross Zwisler <ross.zwisler@...ux.intel.com>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-nvdimm@...1.01.org,
Dave Chinner <david@...morbit.com>, x86@...nel.org,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>,
"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>, Jan Kara <jack@...e.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/2] "big hammer" for DAX msync/fsync correctness
On Wed, Oct 28, 2015 at 06:24:29PM -0400, Jeff Moyer wrote:
> Ross Zwisler <ross.zwisler@...ux.intel.com> writes:
>
> > This series implements the very slow but correct handling for
> > blkdev_issue_flush() with DAX mappings, as discussed here:
> >
> > https://lkml.org/lkml/2015/10/26/116
> >
> > I don't think that we can actually do the
> >
> > on_each_cpu(sync_cache, ...);
> >
> > ...where sync_cache is something like:
> >
> > cache_disable();
> > wbinvd();
> > pcommit();
> > cache_enable();
> >
> > solution as proposed by Dan because WBINVD + PCOMMIT doesn't guarantee that
> > your writes actually make it durably onto the DIMMs. I believe you really do
> > need to loop through the cache lines, flush them with CLWB, then fence and
> > PCOMMIT.
>
> *blink*
> *blink*
>
> So much for not violating the principal of least surprise. I suppose
> you've asked the hardware folks, and they've sent you down this path?
Sadly, yes, this was the guidance from the hardware folks.
--
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