> Ping on this series. Rob, I think I've addressed all your feedback.
> Can you please verify?
I haven't tested it, but it reads OK. I'm OK with just extending
the valid count for bits set to one for now; we can add a new
argument later if a need arises for extending it to express new bits
set
On Thu, May 31, 2018 at 4:36 PM, Robert Elliott wrote:
> The pmem driver don't honor a forced read-only setting for very long:
> $ blockdev --setro /dev/pmem0
> $ blockdev --getro /dev/pmem0
> 1
>
> followed by various commands like these:
> $ blockdev --rereadpt
On Thu, May 31, 2018 at 7:24 PM, Dave Chinner wrote:
> On Thu, May 31, 2018 at 06:57:33PM -0700, Dan Williams wrote:
>> On Thu, May 31, 2018 at 6:26 PM, Dave Chinner wrote:
>> > On Thu, May 31, 2018 at 12:13:32PM -0700, Darrick J. Wong wrote:
>> >> On Tue, May 29, 2018 at 04:01:14PM -0600, Ross
On Thu, May 31, 2018 at 06:57:33PM -0700, Dan Williams wrote:
> On Thu, May 31, 2018 at 6:26 PM, Dave Chinner wrote:
> > On Thu, May 31, 2018 at 12:13:32PM -0700, Darrick J. Wong wrote:
> >> On Tue, May 29, 2018 at 04:01:14PM -0600, Ross Zwisler wrote:
> >> > On Tue, May 29, 2018 at 02:25:10PM
On Thu, May 31, 2018 at 6:26 PM, Dave Chinner wrote:
> On Thu, May 31, 2018 at 12:13:32PM -0700, Darrick J. Wong wrote:
>> On Tue, May 29, 2018 at 04:01:14PM -0600, Ross Zwisler wrote:
>> > On Tue, May 29, 2018 at 02:25:10PM -0700, Darrick J. Wong wrote:
>> > > On Tue, May 29, 2018 at 01:51:01PM
On Thu, May 31, 2018 at 12:13:32PM -0700, Darrick J. Wong wrote:
> On Tue, May 29, 2018 at 04:01:14PM -0600, Ross Zwisler wrote:
> > On Tue, May 29, 2018 at 02:25:10PM -0700, Darrick J. Wong wrote:
> > > On Tue, May 29, 2018 at 01:51:01PM -0600, Ross Zwisler wrote:
> > > > From: Dave Jiang
> > >
On Thu, May 31, 2018 at 4:05 PM, Dave Chinner wrote:
> On Thu, May 31, 2018 at 11:26:43AM -0700, Dan Williams wrote:
>> On Thu, May 31, 2018 at 10:46 AM, Darrick J. Wong
>> wrote:
>> > On Thu, May 31, 2018 at 09:29:15AM -0700, Dan Williams wrote:
>> >> On Thu, May 31, 2018 at 8:07 AM, Ross
The pmem driver don't honor a forced read-only setting for very long:
$ blockdev --setro /dev/pmem0
$ blockdev --getro /dev/pmem0
1
followed by various commands like these:
$ blockdev --rereadpt /dev/pmem0
or
$ mkfs.ext4 /dev/pmem0
results in this
On Thu, May 31, 2018 at 11:26:43AM -0700, Dan Williams wrote:
> On Thu, May 31, 2018 at 10:46 AM, Darrick J. Wong
> wrote:
> > On Thu, May 31, 2018 at 09:29:15AM -0700, Dan Williams wrote:
> >> On Thu, May 31, 2018 at 8:07 AM, Ross Zwisler
> >> wrote:
> >> > On Thu, May 31, 2018 at 11:27:33AM
On Thu, May 31, 2018 at 04:52:06PM -0400, Mike Snitzer wrote:
> On Thu, May 31 2018 at 3:13pm -0400,
> Darrick J. Wong wrote:
>
> > On Tue, May 29, 2018 at 04:01:14PM -0600, Ross Zwisler wrote:
> > > On Tue, May 29, 2018 at 02:25:10PM -0700, Darrick J. Wong wrote:
> > > > On Tue, May 29, 2018
On Fri, May 25, 2018 at 1:49 AM, Qi, Fuli wrote:
>> As mentioned above this function seems to assume that the only DIMM events to
>> send are DIMM health events. It's ok to save other object monitoring to a
>> later patch,
>> but let's at least support DIMM health
>> events:
>>
>>
On Fri, May 25, 2018 at 08:51:22PM +0300, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
> On Mon, May 21, 2018 at 10:31:59AM -0600, Ross Zwisler wrote:
> > Changes since v3:
> > * Updated the text in docs/nvdimm.txt to make it clear that the value
> >being passed in on the command line in an integer made up of
On Thu, May 31, 2018 at 3:08 AM, Jan Kara wrote:
[..]
>> >> As far as I can see reflink+dax would require teaching kernel code
>> >> paths that ->mapping may not be a singular relationship. Something
>> >> along the line's of what Jerome was presenting at LSF to create a
>> >> special value to
On Thu, May 31 2018 at 3:13pm -0400,
Darrick J. Wong wrote:
> On Tue, May 29, 2018 at 04:01:14PM -0600, Ross Zwisler wrote:
> > On Tue, May 29, 2018 at 02:25:10PM -0700, Darrick J. Wong wrote:
> > > On Tue, May 29, 2018 at 01:51:01PM -0600, Ross Zwisler wrote:
> > > > From: Dave Jiang
> > > >
On Thu, May 31, 2018 at 12:13:32PM -0700, Darrick J. Wong wrote:
> On Tue, May 29, 2018 at 04:01:14PM -0600, Ross Zwisler wrote:
> > On Tue, May 29, 2018 at 02:25:10PM -0700, Darrick J. Wong wrote:
> > > On Tue, May 29, 2018 at 01:51:01PM -0600, Ross Zwisler wrote:
> > > > From: Dave Jiang
> > >
On Thu, May 31, 2018 at 12:13 PM, Darrick J. Wong
wrote:
> On Tue, May 29, 2018 at 04:01:14PM -0600, Ross Zwisler wrote:
>> On Tue, May 29, 2018 at 02:25:10PM -0700, Darrick J. Wong wrote:
>> > On Tue, May 29, 2018 at 01:51:01PM -0600, Ross Zwisler wrote:
>> > > From: Dave Jiang
>> > >
>> > >
On Thu, May 31, 2018 at 12:13:32PM -0700, Darrick J. Wong wrote:
> On Tue, May 29, 2018 at 04:01:14PM -0600, Ross Zwisler wrote:
> > On Tue, May 29, 2018 at 02:25:10PM -0700, Darrick J. Wong wrote:
> > > On Tue, May 29, 2018 at 01:51:01PM -0600, Ross Zwisler wrote:
> > > > From: Dave Jiang
> > >
On Thu, May 31, 2018 at 11:26:43AM -0700, Dan Williams wrote:
> On Thu, May 31, 2018 at 10:46 AM, Darrick J. Wong
> wrote:
> > On Thu, May 31, 2018 at 09:29:15AM -0700, Dan Williams wrote:
> >> On Thu, May 31, 2018 at 8:07 AM, Ross Zwisler
> >> wrote:
> >> > On Thu, May 31, 2018 at 11:27:33AM
On Tue, May 29, 2018 at 04:01:14PM -0600, Ross Zwisler wrote:
> On Tue, May 29, 2018 at 02:25:10PM -0700, Darrick J. Wong wrote:
> > On Tue, May 29, 2018 at 01:51:01PM -0600, Ross Zwisler wrote:
> > > From: Dave Jiang
> > >
> > > The function return values are confusing with the way the function
On Thu, May 31, 2018 at 10:46 AM, Darrick J. Wong
wrote:
> On Thu, May 31, 2018 at 09:29:15AM -0700, Dan Williams wrote:
>> On Thu, May 31, 2018 at 8:07 AM, Ross Zwisler
>> wrote:
>> > On Thu, May 31, 2018 at 11:27:33AM +0900, Yasunori Goto wrote:
>> >> Hello,
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> I would like to
On Thu, May 31, 2018 at 09:29:15AM -0700, Dan Williams wrote:
> On Thu, May 31, 2018 at 8:07 AM, Ross Zwisler
> wrote:
> > On Thu, May 31, 2018 at 11:27:33AM +0900, Yasunori Goto wrote:
> >> Hello,
> >>
> >>
> >> I would like to know about the Experimental message of Filesystem DAX.
> >>
On Thu, May 31, 2018 at 8:31 AM, Mikulas Patocka wrote:
>
>
> On Thu, 31 May 2018, Dan Williams wrote:
>
>> On Thu, May 31, 2018 at 1:19 AM, Mikulas Patocka wrote:
>> >
>> >
>> > On Wed, 30 May 2018, Dan Williams wrote:
>> >
>> >> > Great find! Thanks for the due diligence. Feel free to add:
>>
On Thu, May 31, 2018 at 8:07 AM, Ross Zwisler
wrote:
> On Thu, May 31, 2018 at 11:27:33AM +0900, Yasunori Goto wrote:
>> Hello,
>>
>>
>> I would like to know about the Experimental message of Filesystem DAX.
>>
>> DAX enabled. Warning:
On Thu, 31 May 2018, Dan Williams wrote:
> On Thu, May 31, 2018 at 1:19 AM, Mikulas Patocka wrote:
> >
> >
> > On Wed, 30 May 2018, Dan Williams wrote:
> >
> >> > Great find! Thanks for the due diligence. Feel free to add:
> >> >
> >> > Acked-by: Dan Williams
> >> >
> >> > ...on the
On Thu, May 31, 2018 at 11:27:33AM +0900, Yasunori Goto wrote:
> Hello,
>
>
> I would like to know about the Experimental message of Filesystem DAX.
>
> DAX enabled. Warning: EXPERIMENTAL, use at your own risk
>
On Thu, May 31, 2018 at 1:19 AM, Mikulas Patocka wrote:
>
>
> On Wed, 30 May 2018, Dan Williams wrote:
>
>> > Great find! Thanks for the due diligence. Feel free to add:
>> >
>> > Acked-by: Dan Williams
>> >
>> > ...on the reworks to unify ARM and x86.
>>
>> One more note. The side effect of
On Thu, May 31 2018 at 4:16am -0400,
Mikulas Patocka wrote:
>
>
> On Wed, 30 May 2018, Mike Snitzer wrote:
>
> > On Wed, May 30 2018 at 10:09P -0400,
> > Mikulas Patocka wrote:
> >
> > > And what about this?
> > > #define WC_MODE_PMEM(wc)((wc)->pmem_mode)
> > >
>
On Wed 30-05-18 16:21:33, Dan Williams wrote:
> On Wed, May 30, 2018 at 1:13 AM, Jan Kara wrote:
> > On Tue 29-05-18 18:38:41, Dan Williams wrote:
> >> On Wed, May 23, 2018 at 1:40 AM, Jan Kara wrote:
> >> > On Tue 22-05-18 07:39:57, Dan Williams wrote:
> >> >> In support of enabling
On Wed, 30 May 2018, Dan Williams wrote:
> > Great find! Thanks for the due diligence. Feel free to add:
> >
> > Acked-by: Dan Williams
> >
> > ...on the reworks to unify ARM and x86.
>
> One more note. The side effect of not using dax_flush() is that you
> may end up flushing caches on
On Wed, 30 May 2018, Mike Snitzer wrote:
> On Wed, May 30 2018 at 10:09P -0400,
> Mikulas Patocka wrote:
>
> > And what about this?
> > #define WC_MODE_PMEM(wc)((wc)->pmem_mode)
> >
> > The code that I had just allowed the compiler to optimize out
> >
30 matches
Mail list logo