On Wed, 30 May 2018, Dan Williams wrote: > > Great find! Thanks for the due diligence. Feel free to add: > > > > Acked-by: Dan Williams <dan.j.williams@xxxxxxxxx> > > > > ...on the reworks to unify ARM and x86. > > One more note. The side effect of not using dax_flush() is that you > may end up flushing caches on systems where the platform has asserted > it will take responsibility for flushing caches at power loss. If / > when those systems become more prevalent we may want to think of a way > to combine the non-temporal optimization and the cache-flush-bypass > optimizations. However that is something that can wait for a later > change beyond 4.18. We could define memcpy_flushpmem, that falls back to memcpy or memcpy_flushcache, depending on whether the platform flushes the caches at power loss or not. Mikulas -- dm-devel mailing list dm-devel@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/dm-devel
