[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CAJfpeguawgi_Hnn2BwieNntbOCB1ghyijEtUOh4QyOrPis--dw@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 13 Nov 2024 11:48:47 +0100
From: Miklos Szeredi <miklos@...redi.hu>
To: Asahi Lina <lina@...hilina.net>
Cc: Dan Williams <dan.j.williams@...el.com>, Jan Kara <jack@...e.cz>,
Alexander Viro <viro@...iv.linux.org.uk>, Christian Brauner <brauner@...nel.org>,
Matthew Wilcox <willy@...radead.org>, Sergio Lopez Pascual <slp@...hat.com>, asahi@...ts.linux.dev,
linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
Vivek Goyal <vgoyal@...hat.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] fuse: dax: No-op writepages callback
On Tue, 12 Nov 2024 at 20:55, Asahi Lina <lina@...hilina.net> wrote:
>
> When using FUSE DAX with virtiofs, cache coherency is managed by the
> host. Disk persistence is handled via fsync() and friends, which are
> passed directly via the FUSE layer to the host. Therefore, there's no
> need to do dax_writeback_mapping_range(). All that ends up doing is a
> cache flush operation, which is not caught by KVM and doesn't do much,
> since the host and guest are already cache-coherent.
The conclusion seems convincing. But adding Vivek, who originally
added this in commit 9483e7d5809a ("virtiofs: define dax address space
operations").
What I'm not clearly seeing is how virtually aliased CPU caches
interact with this. In mm/filemap.c I see the flush_dcache_folio()
calls which deal with the kernel mapping of a page being in a
different cacheline as the user mapping. How does that work in the
virt environment?
Also I suggest to remove the writepages callback instead of leaving it
as a no-op.
Thanks,
Miklos
Powered by blists - more mailing lists