On Wed, Jun 20, 2018 at 11:17:49AM -0400, Mike Snitzer wrote:
> On Mon, Jun 04 2018 at 7:15pm -0400,
> Ross Zwisler wrote:
>
> > On Fri, Jun 01, 2018 at 05:55:13PM -0400, Mike Snitzer wrote:
> > > On Tue, May 29 2018 at 3:51pm -0400,
> > > Ross Zwisler wrote:
> > >
> > > > Currently the code
On Mon, Jun 04 2018 at 7:15pm -0400,
Ross Zwisler wrote:
> On Fri, Jun 01, 2018 at 05:55:13PM -0400, Mike Snitzer wrote:
> > On Tue, May 29 2018 at 3:51pm -0400,
> > Ross Zwisler wrote:
> >
> > > Currently the code in dm_dax_direct_access() only checks whether the
> > > target
> > > type
On Fri, Jun 01, 2018 at 05:55:13PM -0400, Mike Snitzer wrote:
> On Tue, May 29 2018 at 3:51pm -0400,
> Ross Zwisler wrote:
>
> > Currently the code in dm_dax_direct_access() only checks whether the target
> > type has a direct_access() operation defined, not whether the underlying
> > block
On Tue, May 29 2018 at 3:51pm -0400,
Ross Zwisler wrote:
> Currently the code in dm_dax_direct_access() only checks whether the target
> type has a direct_access() operation defined, not whether the underlying
> block devices all support DAX. This latter property can be seen by looking
> at
Currently the code in dm_dax_direct_access() only checks whether the target
type has a direct_access() operation defined, not whether the underlying
block devices all support DAX. This latter property can be seen by looking
at whether we set the QUEUE_FLAG_DAX request queue flag when creating the
