linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 0/7] re-enable DAX PMD support

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]

Message-ID: <CAPcyv4i+XHZSN_3T_vcrv+sOkEMQzuTKRo4WBFcPxN=TzSk9iw@mail.gmail.com>
Date:	Mon, 15 Aug 2016 14:14:14 -0700
From:	Dan Williams <dan.j.williams@...el.com>
To:	Ross Zwisler <ross.zwisler@...ux.intel.com>,
	Dan Williams <dan.j.williams@...el.com>,
	"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	"Theodore Ts'o" <tytso@....edu>,
	Alexander Viro <viro@...iv.linux.org.uk>,
	Andreas Dilger <adilger.kernel@...ger.ca>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
	Dave Chinner <david@...morbit.com>, Jan Kara <jack@...e.com>,
	linux-ext4 <linux-ext4@...r.kernel.org>,
	linux-fsdevel <linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org>,
	Linux MM <linux-mm@...ck.org>,
	"linux-nvdimm@...ts.01.org" <linux-nvdimm@...ts.01.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/7] re-enable DAX PMD support

On Mon, Aug 15, 2016 at 2:11 PM, Ross Zwisler
<ross.zwisler@...ux.intel.com> wrote:
> On Mon, Aug 15, 2016 at 01:21:47PM -0700, Dan Williams wrote:
>> On Mon, Aug 15, 2016 at 12:09 PM, Ross Zwisler
>> <ross.zwisler@...ux.intel.com> wrote:
>> > DAX PMDs have been disabled since Jan Kara introduced DAX radix tree based
>> > locking.  This series allows DAX PMDs to participate in the DAX radix tree
>> > based locking scheme so that they can be re-enabled.
>>
>> Looks good to me.
>>
>> > This series restores DAX PMD functionality back to what it was before it
>> > was disabled.  There is still a known issue between DAX PMDs and hole
>> > punch, which I am currently working on and which I plan to address with a
>> > separate series.
>>
>> Perhaps we should hold off on applying patch 6 and 7 until after the
>> hole-punch fix is ready?
>
> Sure, I'm cool with holding off on patch 7 (the Kconfig change) until after
> the hole punch fix is ready.
>
> I don't see a reason to hold off on patch 6, though?  It stands on it's own,
> implements the correct locking, and doesn't break anything.

Whoops, I just meant 7.