[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <alpine.DEB.2.11.1511061832590.4032@nanos>
Date: Fri, 6 Nov 2015 18:35:11 +0100 (CET)
From: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>
To: Dan Williams <dan.j.williams@...el.com>
cc: Ross Zwisler <ross.zwisler@...ux.intel.com>,
Jeff Moyer <jmoyer@...hat.com>,
linux-nvdimm <linux-nvdimm@...1.01.org>, X86 ML <x86@...nel.org>,
Dave Chinner <david@...morbit.com>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>,
"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>, Jan Kara <jack@...e.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/2] "big hammer" for DAX msync/fsync correctness
On Fri, 6 Nov 2015, Dan Williams wrote:
> On Fri, Nov 6, 2015 at 12:06 AM, Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de> wrote:
> > Just for the record. Such a flush mechanism with
> >
> > on_each_cpu()
> > wbinvd()
> > ...
> >
> > will make that stuff completely unusable on Real-Time systems. We've
> > been there with the big hammer approach of the intel graphics
> > driver.
>
> Noted. This means RT systems either need to disable DAX or avoid
> fsync. Yes, this is a wart, but not an unexpected one in a first
> generation persistent memory platform.
And it's not just only RT. The folks who are aiming for 100%
undisturbed user space (NOHZ_FULL) will be massively unhappy about
that as well.
Is it really required to do that on all cpus?
Thanks,
tglx
--
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