[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20160912150148.GA10039@infradead.org>
Date: Mon, 12 Sep 2016 08:01:48 -0700
From: Christoph Hellwig <hch@...radead.org>
To: Nicholas Piggin <npiggin@...il.com>
Cc: Christoph Hellwig <hch@...radead.org>,
Oliver O'Halloran <oohall@...il.com>,
Yumei Huang <yuhuang@...hat.com>,
Michal Hocko <mhocko@...e.com>,
Xiao Guangrong <guangrong.xiao@...ux.intel.com>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
KVM list <kvm@...r.kernel.org>, Linux MM <linux-mm@...ck.org>,
Gleb Natapov <gleb@...nel.org>,
"linux-nvdimm@...ts.01.org" <linux-nvdimm@...1.01.org>,
mtosatti@...hat.com,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@...el.com>,
Stefan Hajnoczi <stefanha@...hat.com>,
linux-fsdevel <linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org>,
Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@...hat.com>
Subject: Re: DAX mapping detection (was: Re: [PATCH] Fix region lost in
/proc/self/smaps)
On Mon, Sep 12, 2016 at 06:05:07PM +1000, Nicholas Piggin wrote:
> It's not fundamentally broken, it just doesn't fit well existing
> filesystems.
Or the existing file system architecture for that matter. Which makes
it a fundamentally broken model.
> Dave's post of requirements is also wrong. A filesystem does not have
> to guarantee all that, it only has to guarantee that is the case for
> a given block after it has a mapping and page fault returns, other
> operations can be supported by invalidating mappings, etc.
Which doesn't really matter if your use case is manipulating
fully mapped files.
But back to the point: if you want to use a full blown Linux or Unix
filesystem you will always have to fsync (or variants of it like msync),
period.
If you want a volume manager on stereoids that hands out large chunks
of storage memory that can't ever be moved, truncated, shared, allocated
on demand, etc - implement it in your library on top of a device file.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists