From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Christoph Hellwig Subject: Re: [PATCH v8 1/1] f2fs: dax: implement direct access Date: Wed, 26 Jul 2017 13:11:36 -0700 Message-ID: <20170726201136.GA30039@infradead.org> References: <1500552639-18523-1-git-send-email-sunqiuyang@huawei.com> <20170726072634.GA4684@infradead.org> <20170726170147.GA31930@infradead.org> <20170726172011.GA30142@infradead.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: linux-nvdimm-bounces-hn68Rpc1hR1g9hUCZPvPmw@public.gmane.org Sender: "Linux-nvdimm" To: Dan Williams Cc: "linux-nvdimm-hn68Rpc1hR1g9hUCZPvPmw@public.gmane.org" , Linux Kernel Mailing List , linux-f2fs-devel-5NWGOfrQmneRv+LV9MX5uipxlwaOVQ5f@public.gmane.org, Christoph Hellwig , linux-fsdevel , Jaegeuk Kim , sunqiuyang List-Id: linux-f2fs-devel.lists.sourceforge.net On Wed, Jul 26, 2017 at 12:16:11PM -0700, Dan Williams wrote: > Silently turn on DAX if HMAT says its ok? Yes, absolutely. I want my system to do the right thing by default, and if HMAT says bypassing the page cache is a clear advatange it should be the default. > I think we would instead > want a "-o autodax" for that case and then "-o dax" and "-o nodax" for > the force cases. Why? > I think it's easier to administer than the dax mount option. If > someone wants dax on only in a sub-tree they can set the flag on that > parent directory and have a policy in dax filesystems that children > inherit the dax policy from the parent. That seems a better > administrative model than trying to get it all right globally at mount > time. And why exactly? If DAX is faster for file a in directory X it will be just as fast for a file b in directory Y.