On Tue, Oct 20, 2015 at 7:38 PM, Dave Chinner <da...@fromorbit.com> wrote: > On Tue, Oct 20, 2015 at 05:31:18PM -0700, Dan Williams wrote: >> On Tue, Oct 20, 2015 at 5:01 PM, Dave Chinner <da...@fromorbit.com> wrote: >> > On Tue, Oct 20, 2015 at 11:31:45PM +0000, Williams, Dan J wrote: >> >> Here is a status summary of the topic-branches nvdimm.git is tracking >> >> for v4.4. Unless indicated these branches are not present in -next. >> >> Please ACK, NAK, or ask for a re-post of any of the below to disposition >> >> it for the merge window. >> >> >> >> === >> >> for-4.4/dax-fixes: >> >> === >> > ... >> >> Dave Chinner (5): >> >> xfs: fix inode size update overflow in xfs_map_direct() >> >> xfs: introduce BMAPI_ZERO for allocating zeroed extents >> >> xfs: Don't use unwritten extents for DAX >> >> xfs: DAX does not use IO completion callbacks >> >> xfs: add ->pfn_mkwrite support for DAX >> > >> > Please drop these. They have not been reviewed yet, and because >> > the changes affect more than just DAX (core XFS allocator >> > functionality was changed) these need to go through the XFS tree. >> > >> >> Ok, thanks for the heads up. For the get_user_pages() patches that >> build on these fixes I'm assuming your review bandwidth is in short >> supply to also give an XFS sign-off on those changes for 4.4? > > I'm not aware of any other patches that touch XFS. AFAIA, you > haven't cc'd anything to x...@oss.sgi.com, so it's not on my radar... >
I can cc x...@oss.sgi.com on fs/dax.c changes going forward, but for these I figure it was off topic since nothing touched fs/xfs/. >> I'm wondering if we can take a conservative step forward with those >> patches for 4.4. if XFS and EXT4 interactions need more time to get >> worked out, which I believe they do, I can conceive just turning on >> get_user_pages() support for DAX-mappings of the raw block device. > > Regardless of the ext4/XFS status, isn't it a bit late to be > proposing brand new stuff that nobody has had time to think about > for the next merge window? > The "dax-for-raw-block support" is indeed new, but it's a fairly straightforward extension of these patches that have been out for review since 4.3-rc2, or 4.1-rc6 in the case of the pfn_t enabling. Cutting out the filesystem interactions makes it that much simpler to comprehend. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
