From: "Kani, Toshimitsu" <toshi.kani@hpe.com>
To: "dan.j.williams@intel.com" <dan.j.williams@intel.com>
Cc: "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
"dave.jiang@intel.com" <dave.jiang@intel.com>,
"linux-nvdimm@lists.01.org" <linux-nvdimm@ml01.01.org>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH] dax: add badblocks check to Device DAX
Date: Wed, 3 May 2017 16:09:14 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <1493827750.30303.44.camel@hpe.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAPcyv4hu9iW-EEaggOj4ax_P6=Y28adi5Hb7Rp1Q1xBTWenJuQ@mail.gmail.com>
On Wed, 2017-05-03 at 08:52 -0700, Dan Williams wrote:
> On Wed, May 3, 2017 at 8:31 AM, Toshi Kani <toshi.kani@hpe.com>
> wrote:
> > This is a RFC patch for seeking suggestions. It adds support of
> > badblocks check in Device DAX by using region-level badblocks list.
> > This patch is only briefly tested.
> >
> > device_dax is a well-isolated self-contained module as it calls
> > alloc_dax() with dev_dax, which is private to device_dax. For
> > checking badblocks, it needs to call dax_pmem to check with
> > region-level badblocks.
> >
> > This patch attempts to keep device_dax self-contained. It adds
> > check_error() to dax_operations, and dax_check_error() as a stub
> > with *dev_dax and *dev pointers to convey it to dax_pmem. I am
> > wondering if this is the right direction, or we should change the
> > modularity to let dax_pmem call alloc_dax() with its dax_pmem (or
> > I completely missed something).
>
> The problem is that device-dax guarantees a given fault granularity.
> To make that guarantee we can't fallback from 1G or 2M mappings due
> to an error. We also can't reasonably go the other way and fail
> mappings that contain a badblock because that would change the blast
> radius of a media error to the fault size.
Does it mean we expect users to have CPUs with MCE recovery for Device
DAX? Can we add an attributes like allow error-check & fall-back?
Thanks,
-Toshi
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2017-05-03 16:09 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 14+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2017-05-03 15:31 [RFC PATCH] dax: add badblocks check to Device DAX Toshi Kani
2017-05-03 15:52 ` Dan Williams
2017-05-03 16:09 ` Kani, Toshimitsu [this message]
2017-05-03 16:30 ` Dan Williams
2017-05-03 18:46 ` Kani, Toshimitsu
2017-05-03 21:48 ` Dan Williams
2017-05-03 21:56 ` Dave Jiang
2017-05-03 22:41 ` Kani, Toshimitsu
2017-05-03 22:51 ` Dan Williams
2017-05-03 23:08 ` Dan Williams
2017-05-03 23:25 ` Kani, Toshimitsu
2017-05-03 23:36 ` Kani, Toshimitsu
2017-05-04 2:01 ` Dan Williams
2017-05-04 14:08 ` 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=1493827750.30303.44.camel@hpe.com \
--to=toshi.kani@hpe.com \
--cc=dan.j.williams@intel.com \
--cc=dave.jiang@intel.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-nvdimm@ml01.01.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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox