[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <68fa4244ca3a5_1870d210024@iweiny-mobl.notmuch>
Date: Thu, 23 Oct 2025 09:57:08 -0500
From: Ira Weiny <ira.weiny@...el.com>
To: <dan.j.williams@...el.com>, Michał Cłapiński
<mclapinski@...gle.com>
CC: Vishal Verma <vishal.l.verma@...el.com>, Dave Jiang
<dave.jiang@...el.com>, <nvdimm@...ts.linux.dev>,
<linux-cxl@...r.kernel.org>, Pasha Tatashin <pasha.tatashin@...een.com>,
<linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/1] dax: add PROBE_PREFER_ASYNCHRONOUS to the pmem driver
dan.j.williams@ wrote:
> Michał Cłapiński wrote:
> [..]
> > > However, I believe that falls back to synchronous probing if the driver
> > > is loaded after the device has already arrived. Is that the case you are
> > > hitting?
> >
> > Yes. I use all pmem/devdax modules built into the kernel so loading
> > them is in the critical path for kernel boot.
> > I use memmap= with devdax. So first, the pmem device is created
> > asynchronously, which means loading the nd_e820 module is always fast.
> > But then, the dax_pmem driver is loaded. If the dax device has not yet
> > been created by the async code, then loading this module is also fast.
> > But if the dax device has already been created, then attaching it to
> > the dax_pmem driver will be synchronous and on the critical boot path.
> >
> > For thousands of dax devices, this increases the boot time by more
> > than a second. With the patch it takes ~10ms.
> >
> > > I am ok with this in concept, but if we do this it should be done for
> > > all dax drivers, not just dax_pmem.
> >
> > Will do in v2.
>
> Sounds good, include that detail above and I'll ack / poke Ira to pick
> it up.
Yea if you send to me I'll pick it up. Sorry I did not see this before.
Ira
Powered by blists - more mailing lists