[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <347eb51d-6b0c-75fb-e27f-6bf4969125fe@fujitsu.com>
Date: Thu, 6 Jan 2022 06:42:57 +0000
From: "lizhijian@...itsu.com" <lizhijian@...itsu.com>
To: Jason Gunthorpe <jgg@...pe.ca>,
"lizhijian@...itsu.com" <lizhijian@...itsu.com>
CC: "linux-rdma@...r.kernel.org" <linux-rdma@...r.kernel.org>,
"zyjzyj2000@...il.com" <zyjzyj2000@...il.com>,
"aharonl@...dia.com" <aharonl@...dia.com>,
"leon@...nel.org" <leon@...nel.org>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
"mbloch@...dia.com" <mbloch@...dia.com>,
"liweihang@...wei.com" <liweihang@...wei.com>,
"liangwenpeng@...wei.com" <liangwenpeng@...wei.com>,
"yangx.jy@...itsu.com" <yangx.jy@...itsu.com>,
"rpearsonhpe@...il.com" <rpearsonhpe@...il.com>,
"y-goto@...itsu.com" <y-goto@...itsu.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH rdma-next 08/10] RDMA/rxe: Implement flush execution
in responder side
On 06/01/2022 08:28, Jason Gunthorpe wrote:
> On Tue, Dec 28, 2021 at 04:07:15PM +0800, Li Zhijian wrote:
>> + while (length > 0) {
>> + va = (u8 *)(uintptr_t)buf->addr + offset;
>> + bytes = buf->size - offset;
>> +
>> + if (bytes > length)
>> + bytes = length;
>> +
>> + arch_wb_cache_pmem(va, bytes);
> So why did we need to check that the va was pmem to call this?
Sorry, i didn't get you.
I didn't check whether va is pmem, since only MR registered with PERSISTENCE(only pmem can
register this access flag) can reach here.
Thanks
Zhijian
>
> Jason
Powered by blists - more mailing lists