On Fri, Oct 22, 2021 at 12:49:15AM +0000, Jane Chu wrote: > I've looked through your "futher decouple DAX from block devices" series > and likes the use of xarray in place of the host hash list. > Which upstream version is the series based upon? > If it's based on your development repo, I'd be happy to take a clone > and rebase my patches on yours if you provide a link. Please let me > know the best way to cooperate. It is based on linux-next from when it was posted. A git tree is here: http://git.infradead.org/users/hch/misc.git/shortlog/refs/heads/dax-block-cleanup > That said, I'm unclear at what you're trying to suggest with respect > to the 'DAXDEV_F_RECOVERY' flag. The flag came from upper dax-fs > call stack to the dm target layer, and the dm targets are equipped > with handling pmem driver specific task, so it appears that the flag > would need to be passed down to the native pmem layer, right? > Am I totally missing your point? We'll need to pass it through (assuming we want to keep supporting dm, see the recent discussion with Dan). FYI, here is a sketch where I'd like to move to, but this isn't properly tested yet: http://git.infradead.org/users/hch/misc.git/shortlog/refs/heads/dax-devirtualize To support something like DAXDEV_F_RECOVERYwe'd need a separate dax_operations methods. Which to me suggest it probably should be a different operation (fallocate / ioctl / etc) as Darrick did earlier. -- dm-devel mailing list dm-devel@xxxxxxxxxx https://listman.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/dm-devel
