From: Boaz Harrosh <boaz@plexistor.com>
To: Dan Williams <dan.j.williams@intel.com>,
Boaz Harrosh <boaz@plexistor.com>
Cc: "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
Jens Axboe <axboe@kernel.dk>, Rik van Riel <riel@redhat.com>,
"linux-nvdimm@lists.01.org" <linux-nvdimm@lists.01.org>,
Linux MM <linux-mm@kvack.org>, Mel Gorman <mgorman@suse.de>,
"torvalds@linux-foundation.org" <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>,
Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v5 2/5] allow mapping page-less memremaped areas into KVA
Date: Thu, 13 Aug 2015 16:23:38 +0300 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <55CC9A5A.1020209@plexistor.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAPcyv4gwFD5F=k_qQyf68z74Opzf1t4DMqY+A9D2w_Fwsbzvew@mail.gmail.com>
On 08/13/2015 03:57 PM, Dan Williams wrote:
<>
> This is explicitly addressed in the changelog, repeated here:
>
>> The __pfn_t to resource lookup is indeed inefficient walking of a linked list,
>> but there are two mitigating factors:
>>
>> 1/ The number of persistent memory ranges is bounded by the number of
>> DIMMs which is on the order of 10s of DIMMs, not hundreds.
>>
You do not get where I'm comming from. It used to be a [ptr - ONE_BASE + OTHER_BASE]
(In 64 bit) it is now a call and a loop and a search. how ever you will look at
it is *not* the instantaneous address translation it is now.
I have memory I want memory speeds. You keep thinking HD speeds, where what ever
you do will not matter.
>> 2/ The lookup yields the entire range, if it becomes inefficient to do a
>> kmap_atomic_pfn_t() a PAGE_SIZE at a time the caller can take
>> advantage of the fact that the lookup can be amortized for all kmap
>> operations it needs to perform in a given range.
>
What "given range" how can a bdev assume that the all sg-list belongs to the
same "range". In fact our code does multple-pmem devices for a long time.
What about say md-of-pmems for example, or btrfs
> DAX as is is races against pmem unbind. A synchronization cost must
> be paid somewhere to make sure the memremap() mapping is still valid.
Sorry for being so slow, is what I asked. what is exactly "pmem unbind" ?
Currently in my 4.1 Kernel the ioremap is done on modprobe time and
released modprobe --remove time. the --remove can not happen with a mounted
FS dax or not. So what is exactly "pmem unbind". And if there is a new knob
then make it refuse with a raised refcount.
Cheers
Boaz
--
To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in
the body to majordomo@kvack.org. For more info on Linux MM,
see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ .
Don't email: <a href=mailto:"dont@kvack.org"> email@kvack.org </a>
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Boaz Harrosh <boaz@plexistor.com>
To: Dan Williams <dan.j.williams@intel.com>,
Boaz Harrosh <boaz@plexistor.com>
Cc: "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
Jens Axboe <axboe@kernel.dk>, Rik van Riel <riel@redhat.com>,
"linux-nvdimm@lists.01.org" <linux-nvdimm@ml01.01.org>,
Linux MM <linux-mm@kvack.org>, Mel Gorman <mgorman@suse.de>,
"torvalds@linux-foundation.org" <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>,
Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v5 2/5] allow mapping page-less memremaped areas into KVA
Date: Thu, 13 Aug 2015 16:23:38 +0300 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <55CC9A5A.1020209@plexistor.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAPcyv4gwFD5F=k_qQyf68z74Opzf1t4DMqY+A9D2w_Fwsbzvew@mail.gmail.com>
On 08/13/2015 03:57 PM, Dan Williams wrote:
<>
> This is explicitly addressed in the changelog, repeated here:
>
>> The __pfn_t to resource lookup is indeed inefficient walking of a linked list,
>> but there are two mitigating factors:
>>
>> 1/ The number of persistent memory ranges is bounded by the number of
>> DIMMs which is on the order of 10s of DIMMs, not hundreds.
>>
You do not get where I'm comming from. It used to be a [ptr - ONE_BASE + OTHER_BASE]
(In 64 bit) it is now a call and a loop and a search. how ever you will look at
it is *not* the instantaneous address translation it is now.
I have memory I want memory speeds. You keep thinking HD speeds, where what ever
you do will not matter.
>> 2/ The lookup yields the entire range, if it becomes inefficient to do a
>> kmap_atomic_pfn_t() a PAGE_SIZE at a time the caller can take
>> advantage of the fact that the lookup can be amortized for all kmap
>> operations it needs to perform in a given range.
>
What "given range" how can a bdev assume that the all sg-list belongs to the
same "range". In fact our code does multple-pmem devices for a long time.
What about say md-of-pmems for example, or btrfs
> DAX as is is races against pmem unbind. A synchronization cost must
> be paid somewhere to make sure the memremap() mapping is still valid.
Sorry for being so slow, is what I asked. what is exactly "pmem unbind" ?
Currently in my 4.1 Kernel the ioremap is done on modprobe time and
released modprobe --remove time. the --remove can not happen with a mounted
FS dax or not. So what is exactly "pmem unbind". And if there is a new knob
then make it refuse with a raised refcount.
Cheers
Boaz
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2015-08-13 13:23 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 42+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2015-08-13 3:00 [PATCH v5 0/5] introduce __pfn_t for unmapped pfn I/O and DAX lifetime Dan Williams
2015-08-13 3:00 ` Dan Williams
2015-08-13 3:01 ` [PATCH v5 1/5] mm: move __phys_to_pfn and __pfn_to_phys to asm/generic/memory_model.h Dan Williams
2015-08-13 3:01 ` Dan Williams
2015-08-13 3:01 ` [PATCH v5 2/5] allow mapping page-less memremaped areas into KVA Dan Williams
2015-08-13 3:01 ` Dan Williams
2015-08-13 5:58 ` Boaz Harrosh
2015-08-13 5:58 ` Boaz Harrosh
2015-08-13 12:57 ` Dan Williams
2015-08-13 12:57 ` Dan Williams
2015-08-13 13:23 ` Boaz Harrosh [this message]
2015-08-13 13:23 ` Boaz Harrosh
2015-08-13 14:41 ` Christoph Hellwig
2015-08-13 14:41 ` Christoph Hellwig
2015-08-13 15:01 ` Boaz Harrosh
2015-08-13 15:01 ` Boaz Harrosh
2015-08-13 14:37 ` Christoph Hellwig
2015-08-13 14:37 ` Christoph Hellwig
2015-08-13 14:48 ` Boaz Harrosh
2015-08-13 14:48 ` Boaz Harrosh
2015-08-13 15:29 ` Boaz Harrosh
2015-08-13 15:29 ` Boaz Harrosh
2015-08-13 17:37 ` Dave Hansen
2015-08-13 17:37 ` Dave Hansen
2015-08-13 17:35 ` Matthew Wilcox
2015-08-13 17:35 ` Matthew Wilcox
2015-08-13 18:15 ` Dan Williams
2015-08-13 18:15 ` Dan Williams
2015-08-13 3:01 ` [PATCH v5 3/5] dax: drop size parameter to ->direct_access() Dan Williams
2015-08-13 3:01 ` Dan Williams
2015-08-13 3:01 ` [PATCH v5 4/5] dax: fix mapping lifetime handling, convert to __pfn_t + kmap_atomic_pfn_t() Dan Williams
2015-08-13 3:01 ` Dan Williams
2015-08-13 6:26 ` Boaz Harrosh
2015-08-13 6:26 ` Boaz Harrosh
2015-08-13 15:21 ` Dan Williams
2015-08-13 15:21 ` Dan Williams
2015-08-13 16:34 ` Boaz Harrosh
2015-08-13 16:34 ` Boaz Harrosh
2015-08-13 18:51 ` Dan Williams
2015-08-13 18:51 ` Dan Williams
2015-08-13 3:01 ` [PATCH v5 5/5] scatterlist: convert to __pfn_t Dan Williams
2015-08-13 3:01 ` Dan Williams
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=55CC9A5A.1020209@plexistor.com \
--to=boaz@plexistor.com \
--cc=axboe@kernel.dk \
--cc=dan.j.williams@intel.com \
--cc=hch@lst.de \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
--cc=linux-nvdimm@lists.01.org \
--cc=mgorman@suse.de \
--cc=riel@redhat.com \
--cc=torvalds@linux-foundation.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.