Christoph Hellwig <h...@lst.de> writes: > On Mon, Jun 22, 2015 at 11:02:24AM -0400, Jeff Moyer wrote: >> Agreed, we can't audit all code, and springing this potential data >> corruptor on people seems irresponsible. > > How do "the people" know they'd have to use btt in the current setup > without auditing their stack first?
Right now, the guidance should be to always use btt since there are no applications that are directly taking advantage of persistent memory (that I know). I expect documentation would take care of that. I also expect that, as applications add support, they would note the requirement for dax mountpoints in their documentation. So, "the people" find out the same way they always have. :) Cheers, Jeff -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
