All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Boaz Harrosh <boaz@plexistor.com>
To: Ross Zwisler <ross.zwisler@linux.intel.com>
Cc: Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>,
	x86@kernel.org, linux-kernel <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
	"Roger C. Pao" <rcpao.enmotus@gmail.com>,
	Dan Williams <dan.j.williams@intel.com>,
	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
	Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>,
	linux-nvdimm <linux-nvdimm@lists.01.org>,
	"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@zytor.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/3] pmem: Allow request_mem to fail, (CONFIG_BLK_DEV_PMEM_IGNORE_REQUEST_MEM_RET)
Date: Wed, 18 Feb 2015 11:58:00 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <54E46228.9060308@plexistor.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1424206333.12687.8.camel@theros.lm.intel.com>

On 02/17/2015 10:52 PM, Ross Zwisler wrote:
> On Mon, 2015-02-16 at 13:24 +0200, Boaz Harrosh wrote:
>> With old Kernels there was a bug in x86 where any unknown
>> memory chip type would come up BUSY when calling
>> request_mem_region_exclusive().
>>
>> So for pmem to work with old Kernels and real NvDIMM chips
>> we have a new Kconfig option CONFIG_BLK_DEV_PMEM_IGNORE_REQUEST_MEM_RET.
>>
>> People have been running with hacked up pmem that will ignore
>> the return code from request_mem_region_exclusive. So here it is
>> official
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Boaz Harrosh <boaz@plexistor.com>
> 

Hi Ross, good morning

> I'm confused - I thought that this behavior was fixed by patch 1/3?
> With that patch this memory reservation should not fail, correct?
> 

Yes, I have tested it extensively and PATCH-1/3 fixes this problem
for sure.

> If so, why do we need this patch?
> 

I put in this patch for people that do-not-want/cannot compile their
own Kernel but have a need for pmem.c regardless. I will not include
this patch in the final submitted Kernel. Given that patch-1 gets
accepted before the merge of pmem.

Lets say that patch-1 and patch-3 are either or. A tree
that has 1/3 does not need 3/3, a tree that does not have 1/3 needs
3/3.

<>

Thanks
Boaz


WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Boaz Harrosh <boaz@plexistor.com>
To: Ross Zwisler <ross.zwisler@linux.intel.com>
Cc: Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>,
	x86@kernel.org, linux-kernel <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
	"Roger C. Pao" <rcpao.enmotus@gmail.com>,
	Dan Williams <dan.j.williams@intel.com>,
	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
	Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>,
	linux-nvdimm <linux-nvdimm@ml01.01.org>,
	"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@zytor.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/3] pmem: Allow request_mem to fail, (CONFIG_BLK_DEV_PMEM_IGNORE_REQUEST_MEM_RET)
Date: Wed, 18 Feb 2015 11:58:00 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <54E46228.9060308@plexistor.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1424206333.12687.8.camel@theros.lm.intel.com>

On 02/17/2015 10:52 PM, Ross Zwisler wrote:
> On Mon, 2015-02-16 at 13:24 +0200, Boaz Harrosh wrote:
>> With old Kernels there was a bug in x86 where any unknown
>> memory chip type would come up BUSY when calling
>> request_mem_region_exclusive().
>>
>> So for pmem to work with old Kernels and real NvDIMM chips
>> we have a new Kconfig option CONFIG_BLK_DEV_PMEM_IGNORE_REQUEST_MEM_RET.
>>
>> People have been running with hacked up pmem that will ignore
>> the return code from request_mem_region_exclusive. So here it is
>> official
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Boaz Harrosh <boaz@plexistor.com>
> 

Hi Ross, good morning

> I'm confused - I thought that this behavior was fixed by patch 1/3?
> With that patch this memory reservation should not fail, correct?
> 

Yes, I have tested it extensively and PATCH-1/3 fixes this problem
for sure.

> If so, why do we need this patch?
> 

I put in this patch for people that do-not-want/cannot compile their
own Kernel but have a need for pmem.c regardless. I will not include
this patch in the final submitted Kernel. Given that patch-1 gets
accepted before the merge of pmem.

Lets say that patch-1 and patch-3 are either or. A tree
that has 1/3 does not need 3/3, a tree that does not have 1/3 needs
3/3.

<>

Thanks
Boaz


  reply	other threads:[~2015-02-18  9:58 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 44+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2015-02-16 11:07 [PATCH 0/2] e820: Fix handling of NvDIMM chips Boaz Harrosh
2015-02-16 11:07 ` Boaz Harrosh
2015-02-16 11:13 ` [PATCH 1/2] e820: Don't let unknown DIMM type come out BUSY Boaz Harrosh
2015-02-16 11:13   ` Boaz Harrosh
2015-02-16 11:16 ` [RFC 2/2] e820: Add the NvDIMM Memory type (type-12) Boaz Harrosh
2015-02-16 11:16   ` Boaz Harrosh
2015-02-16 11:24 ` [PATCH 3/3] pmem: Allow request_mem to fail, (CONFIG_BLK_DEV_PMEM_IGNORE_REQUEST_MEM_RET) Boaz Harrosh
2015-02-16 11:24   ` Boaz Harrosh
2015-02-17 20:52   ` Ross Zwisler
2015-02-17 20:52     ` Ross Zwisler
2015-02-18  9:58     ` Boaz Harrosh [this message]
2015-02-18  9:58       ` Boaz Harrosh
2015-02-16 22:03 ` [Linux-nvdimm] [PATCH 0/2] e820: Fix handling of NvDIMM chips Matthew Wilcox
2015-02-16 22:03   ` Matthew Wilcox
2015-02-17  8:42   ` Boaz Harrosh
2015-02-17  8:42     ` Boaz Harrosh
2015-02-18 18:15     ` Dan Williams
2015-02-18 18:15       ` Dan Williams
2015-02-18 18:30       ` Ingo Molnar
2015-02-18 18:30         ` Ingo Molnar
2015-02-18 18:44         ` Dan Williams
2015-02-18 18:44           ` Dan Williams
2015-02-18 18:53           ` Ingo Molnar
2015-02-18 18:53             ` Ingo Molnar
2015-02-18 19:18             ` Dan Williams
2015-02-18 19:18               ` Dan Williams
2015-02-18 19:27               ` Ingo Molnar
2015-02-18 19:27                 ` Ingo Molnar
2015-02-18 19:35                 ` Dan Williams
2015-02-18 19:35                   ` Dan Williams
2015-02-19 10:27                   ` Boaz Harrosh
2015-02-19 10:27                     ` Boaz Harrosh
2015-02-19 10:30                     ` Ingo Molnar
2015-02-19 10:30                       ` Ingo Molnar
2015-02-19  0:47       ` Christoph Hellwig
2015-02-19  1:03         ` Dan Williams
2015-02-19 10:01           ` Ingo Molnar
2015-02-19 10:29             ` Boaz Harrosh
2015-02-19 10:31               ` Ingo Molnar
2015-02-19 10:40                 ` Boaz Harrosh
2015-02-19  9:25         ` Boaz Harrosh
2015-02-22 16:27           ` Christoph Hellwig
2015-02-22 17:05             ` Boaz Harrosh
2015-02-22 17:15               ` Boaz Harrosh

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=54E46228.9060308@plexistor.com \
    --to=boaz@plexistor.com \
    --cc=dan.j.williams@intel.com \
    --cc=hpa@zytor.com \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-nvdimm@lists.01.org \
    --cc=mingo@redhat.com \
    --cc=rcpao.enmotus@gmail.com \
    --cc=ross.zwisler@linux.intel.com \
    --cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
    --cc=torvalds@linux-foundation.org \
    --cc=x86@kernel.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.