linux-kernel - Re: [RFC] nvfs: a filesystem for persistent memory

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: <CAPcyv4iys4xDnDyuzo4yj1MvOWXkQ_NgPfupB=btZt_kzi29Ug@mail.gmail.com>
Date:   Mon, 21 Sep 2020 09:29:39 -0700
From:   Dan Williams <dan.j.williams@...el.com>
To:     Mikulas Patocka <mpatocka@...hat.com>
Cc:     Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
        Alexander Viro <viro@...iv.linux.org.uk>,
        Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
        Vishal Verma <vishal.l.verma@...el.com>,
        Dave Jiang <dave.jiang@...el.com>,
        Ira Weiny <ira.weiny@...el.com>,
        Matthew Wilcox <willy@...radead.org>, Jan Kara <jack@...e.cz>,
        Eric Sandeen <esandeen@...hat.com>,
        Dave Chinner <dchinner@...hat.com>,
        "Kani, Toshi" <toshi.kani@....com>,
        "Norton, Scott J" <scott.norton@....com>,
        "Tadakamadla, Rajesh (DCIG/CDI/HPS Perf)" 
        <rajesh.tadakamadla@....com>,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        linux-fsdevel <linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org>,
        linux-nvdimm <linux-nvdimm@...ts.01.org>
Subject: Re: [RFC] nvfs: a filesystem for persistent memory

On Mon, Sep 21, 2020 at 9:19 AM Mikulas Patocka <mpatocka@...hat.com> wrote:
>
>
>
> On Tue, 15 Sep 2020, Dan Williams wrote:
>
> > > TODO:
> > >
> > > - programs run approximately 4% slower when running from Optane-based
> > > persistent memory. Therefore, programs and libraries should use page cache
> > > and not DAX mapping.
> >
> > This needs to be based on platform firmware data f(ACPI HMAT) for the
> > relative performance of a PMEM range vs DRAM. For example, this
> > tradeoff should not exist with battery backed DRAM, or virtio-pmem.
>
> Hi
>
> I have implemented this functionality - if we mmap a file with
> (vma->vm_flags & VM_DENYWRITE), then it is assumed that this is executable
> file mapping - the flag S_DAX on the inode is cleared on and the inode
> will use normal page cache.
>
> Is there some way how to test if we are using Optane-based module (where
> this optimization should be applied) or battery backed DRAM (where it
> should not)?

No, there's no direct reliable type information. Instead the firmware
on ACPI platforms provides the HMAT table which provides performance
details of system-memory ranges.