[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20170726172011.GA30142@infradead.org>
Date: Wed, 26 Jul 2017 10:20:11 -0700
From: Christoph Hellwig <hch@...radead.org>
To: Dan Williams <dan.j.williams@...el.com>
Cc: Christoph Hellwig <hch@...radead.org>,
"linux-nvdimm@...ts.01.org" <linux-nvdimm@...1.01.org>,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
linux-f2fs-devel@...ts.sourceforge.net,
linux-fsdevel <linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org>,
Jaegeuk Kim <jaegeuk@...nel.org>,
sunqiuyang <sunqiuyang@...wei.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v8 1/1] f2fs: dax: implement direct access
On Wed, Jul 26, 2017 at 10:11:08AM -0700, Dan Williams wrote:
> Until HMAT came along we had no data in the kernel how to pick a sane
> default, but we could now very easily make a "if pmem performance <
> dram, disable dax by default" policy in the kernel.
I'd rather do it the other way around - if HMAT is present and
pmem performance >= dram use dax. Else require the explicit -o dax
for now to enable it. If an explicit -o nodax is specified disable
DAX even if HMAT says it is faster.
> The question for this patch is do we want to add yet another
> filesystem that adds "-o dax" or require use of per-inode flags to
> enable dax.
Please stick to the mount option. After spending a lot of time with
DAX and various memory techologies I'm pretty confident that the inode
flag is the wrong thing to do.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists