All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Christoph Hellwig <hch@infradead.org>
To: Dan Williams <dan.j.williams@intel.com>
Cc: "linux-nvdimm@lists.01.org" <linux-nvdimm@lists.01.org>,
	"linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org>,
	OGAWA Hirofumi <hirofumi@mail.parknet.co.jp>
Subject: Re: FIle copy to FAT FS on NVDIMM hits BUG_ON at fs/buffer.c:3305!
Date: Wed, 26 Jul 2017 10:03:40 -0700	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20170726170340.GA8576@infradead.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAPcyv4j4ifRiS-J42p1DfOU0TjMYAyc1_==72+RPXvutyXxpMA@mail.gmail.com>

On Wed, Jul 26, 2017 at 09:08:00AM -0700, Dan Williams wrote:
> Another question, does ->rw_page() really buy us that much with the
> pmem driver? If applications want to enjoy the lowest latency access
> they can just use DAX. There's now only 4 drivers that use rw_page
> since nvme dropped its usage and I'd be inclined to just rip it out.

nvme never supported rw_page (there was a page for it, but it
fortunately never got merged).

rw_page are massive pain the ass and the method should go away.
For make_request drivers that actually operate synchronous (e.g.
the ramdisk) it's not much of a benefit, and even for normally
asynchronous drivers like nvme the block layer polling interface
is much more suitable.
_______________________________________________
Linux-nvdimm mailing list
Linux-nvdimm@lists.01.org
https://lists.01.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-nvdimm

WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Christoph Hellwig <hch@infradead.org>
To: Dan Williams <dan.j.williams@intel.com>
Cc: Ross Zwisler <ross.zwisler@linux.intel.com>,
	OGAWA Hirofumi <hirofumi@mail.parknet.co.jp>,
	Johannes Thumshirn <jthumshirn@suse.de>,
	"Kani, Toshimitsu" <toshi.kani@hpe.com>,
	"linux-nvdimm@lists.01.org" <linux-nvdimm@lists.01.org>,
	"linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: FIle copy to FAT FS on NVDIMM hits BUG_ON at fs/buffer.c:3305!
Date: Wed, 26 Jul 2017 10:03:40 -0700	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20170726170340.GA8576@infradead.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAPcyv4j4ifRiS-J42p1DfOU0TjMYAyc1_==72+RPXvutyXxpMA@mail.gmail.com>

On Wed, Jul 26, 2017 at 09:08:00AM -0700, Dan Williams wrote:
> Another question, does ->rw_page() really buy us that much with the
> pmem driver? If applications want to enjoy the lowest latency access
> they can just use DAX. There's now only 4 drivers that use rw_page
> since nvme dropped its usage and I'd be inclined to just rip it out.

nvme never supported rw_page (there was a page for it, but it
fortunately never got merged).

rw_page are massive pain the ass and the method should go away.
For make_request drivers that actually operate synchronous (e.g.
the ramdisk) it's not much of a benefit, and even for normally
asynchronous drivers like nvme the block layer polling interface
is much more suitable.

  reply	other threads:[~2017-07-26 17:01 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 26+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2017-07-25 21:37 FIle copy to FAT FS on NVDIMM hits BUG_ON at fs/buffer.c:3305! Kani, Toshimitsu
2017-07-25 21:37 ` Kani, Toshimitsu
2017-07-25 22:22 ` Ross Zwisler
2017-07-25 22:22   ` Ross Zwisler
2017-07-25 22:27   ` Kani, Toshimitsu
2017-07-25 22:27     ` Kani, Toshimitsu
2017-07-26  8:21   ` Johannes Thumshirn
2017-07-26  8:21     ` Johannes Thumshirn
2017-07-26  9:23     ` OGAWA Hirofumi
2017-07-26  9:23       ` OGAWA Hirofumi
2017-07-26 14:23       ` Ross Zwisler
2017-07-26 14:23         ` Ross Zwisler
2017-07-26 16:08         ` Dan Williams
2017-07-26 16:08           ` Dan Williams
2017-07-26 17:03           ` Christoph Hellwig [this message]
2017-07-26 17:03             ` Christoph Hellwig
2017-07-26 17:11       ` Matthew Wilcox
2017-07-26 17:11         ` Matthew Wilcox
2017-07-27 16:12         ` Kani, Toshimitsu
2017-07-27 16:12           ` Kani, Toshimitsu
2017-07-27 18:03           ` Ross Zwisler
2017-07-27 18:03             ` Ross Zwisler
2017-07-27 18:20             ` Kani, Toshimitsu
2017-07-27 18:20               ` Kani, Toshimitsu
2017-09-20 21:04           ` Kani, Toshimitsu
2017-09-20 21:04             ` Kani, Toshimitsu

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=20170726170340.GA8576@infradead.org \
    --to=hch@infradead.org \
    --cc=dan.j.williams@intel.com \
    --cc=hirofumi@mail.parknet.co.jp \
    --cc=linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-nvdimm@lists.01.org \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body. 
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.