From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1754268AbbHaT0p (ORCPT ); Mon, 31 Aug 2015 15:26:45 -0400 Received: from mga01.intel.com ([192.55.52.88]:41918 "EHLO mga01.intel.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1754177AbbHaT0m (ORCPT ); Mon, 31 Aug 2015 15:26:42 -0400 X-ExtLoop1: 1 X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.17,443,1437462000"; d="scan'208";a="552416960" Date: Mon, 31 Aug 2015 13:26:40 -0600 From: Ross Zwisler To: Christoph Hellwig Cc: Ross Zwisler , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Alexander Viro , Andrew Morton , Dave Hansen , "H. Peter Anvin" , Hugh Dickins , Ingo Molnar , "Kirill A. Shutemov" , linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, linux-mm@kvack.org, linux-nvdimm@ml01.01.org, Matthew Wilcox , Peter Zijlstra , Thomas Gleixner , x86@kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH] dax, pmem: add support for msync Message-ID: <20150831192640.GA15717@linux.intel.com> Mail-Followup-To: Ross Zwisler , Christoph Hellwig , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Alexander Viro , Andrew Morton , Dave Hansen , "H. Peter Anvin" , Hugh Dickins , Ingo Molnar , "Kirill A. Shutemov" , linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, linux-mm@kvack.org, linux-nvdimm@lists.01.org, Matthew Wilcox , Peter Zijlstra , Thomas Gleixner , x86@kernel.org References: <1441047584-14664-1-git-send-email-ross.zwisler@linux.intel.com> <20150831190619.GA27141@lst.de> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20150831190619.GA27141@lst.de> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.23 (2014-03-12) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Mon, Aug 31, 2015 at 09:06:19PM +0200, Christoph Hellwig wrote: > On Mon, Aug 31, 2015 at 12:59:44PM -0600, Ross Zwisler wrote: > > For DAX msync we just need to flush the given range using > > wb_cache_pmem(), which is now a public part of the PMEM API. > > > > The inclusion of in fs/dax.c was done to make checkpatch > > happy. Previously it was complaining about a bunch of undeclared > > functions that could be made static. > > Should this be abstracted by adding a ->msync method? Maybe not > worth to do for now, but it might be worth to keep that in mind. Where would we add the ->msync method? Do you mean to the PMEM API, or somewhere else?