On Thu, 5 Nov 2015, Dan Williams wrote:
> On Wed, Oct 28, 2015 at 3:51 PM, Ross Zwisler
> <ross.zwis...@linux.intel.com> wrote:
> > On Wed, Oct 28, 2015 at 06:24:29PM -0400, Jeff Moyer wrote:
> >> Ross Zwisler <ross.zwis...@linux.intel.com> writes:
> >>
> >> > This series implements the very slow but correct handling for
> >> > blkdev_issue_flush() with DAX mappings, as discussed here:
> >> >
> >> > https://lkml.org/lkml/2015/10/26/116
> >> >
> >> > I don't think that we can actually do the
> >> >
> >> > on_each_cpu(sync_cache, ...);
> >> >
> >> > ...where sync_cache is something like:
> >> >
> >> > cache_disable();
> >> > wbinvd();
> >> > pcommit();
> >> > cache_enable();
> >> >
> >> > solution as proposed by Dan because WBINVD + PCOMMIT doesn't guarantee
> >> > that
> >> > your writes actually make it durably onto the DIMMs. I believe you
> >> > really do
> >> > need to loop through the cache lines, flush them with CLWB, then fence
> >> > and
> >> > PCOMMIT.
> >>
> >> *blink*
> >> *blink*
> >>
> >> So much for not violating the principal of least surprise. I suppose
> >> you've asked the hardware folks, and they've sent you down this path?
> >
> > Sadly, yes, this was the guidance from the hardware folks.
>
> So it turns out we weren't asking the right question. wbinvd may
> indeed be viable... we're still working through the caveats.
Just for the record. Such a flush mechanism with
on_each_cpu()
wbinvd()
...
will make that stuff completely unusable on Real-Time systems. We've
been there with the big hammer approach of the intel graphics
driver.
Thanks,
tglx
--
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/
