From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Date: Tue, 26 Sep 2017 11:16:38 -0600 From: Ross Zwisler To: Christoph Hellwig Cc: Ross Zwisler , Andrew Morton , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, "Darrick J. Wong" , "J. Bruce Fields" , Dan Williams , Dave Chinner , Jan Kara , Jeff Layton , linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, linux-mm@kvack.org, linux-nvdimm@lists.01.org, linux-xfs@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/7] xfs: validate bdev support for DAX inode flag Message-ID: <20170926171638.GA20159@linux.intel.com> References: <20170925231404.32723-1-ross.zwisler@linux.intel.com> <20170925231404.32723-3-ross.zwisler@linux.intel.com> <20170926063650.GE6870@lst.de> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20170926063650.GE6870@lst.de> Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org List-ID: On Tue, Sep 26, 2017 at 08:36:50AM +0200, Christoph Hellwig wrote: > On Mon, Sep 25, 2017 at 05:13:59PM -0600, Ross Zwisler wrote: > > Currently only the blocksize is checked, but we should really be calling > > bdev_dax_supported() which also tests to make sure we can get a > > struct dax_device and that the dax_direct_access() path is working. > > > > This is the same check that we do for the "-o dax" mount option in > > xfs_fs_fill_super(). > > > > Signed-off-by: Ross Zwisler > > Reviewed-by: Christoph Hellwig > > I think we just want to pick this up ASAP. And between my vague > memoried and that reviewed-by tag it already was part of a different > series, wasn't it? Yep, the first 2 patches were part of this series: https://lkml.org/lkml/2017/9/7/552 which you reviewed. I included them in this series because the later patches needed to build on them. It looks like they are now in Darrick's xfs-4.14-fixes branch, but haven't yet made it upstream. -- 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: email@kvack.org