On Fri 16-12-16 17:35:35, Dan Williams wrote: > On Tue, Dec 13, 2016 at 10:57 AM, Dan Williams <dan.j.williams@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > On Tue, Dec 13, 2016 at 3:52 AM, Jan Kara <jack@xxxxxxx> wrote: > >> On Mon 12-12-16 17:47:02, Jan Kara wrote: > >>> Hello, > >>> > >>> this is the third revision of my fixes of races when invalidating hole pages in > >>> DAX mappings. See changelogs for details. The series is based on my patches to > >>> write-protect DAX PTEs which are currently carried in mm tree. This is a hard > >>> dependency because we really need to closely track dirtiness (and cleanness!) > >>> of radix tree entries in DAX mappings in order to avoid discarding valid dirty > >>> bits leading to missed cache flushes on fsync(2). > >>> > >>> The tests have passed xfstests for xfs and ext4 in DAX and non-DAX mode. > >>> > >>> Johannes, are you OK with patch 2/6 in its current form? I'd like to push these > >>> patches to some tree once DAX write-protection patches are merged. I'm hoping > >>> to get at least first three patches merged for 4.10-rc2... Thanks! > >> > >> OK, with the final ack from Johannes and since this is mostly DAX stuff, > >> can we take this through NVDIMM tree and push to Linus either late in the > >> merge window or for -rc2? These patches require my DAX patches sitting in mm > >> tree so they can be included in any git tree only once those patches land > >> in Linus' tree (which may happen only once Dave and Ted push out their > >> stuff - this is the most convoluted merge window I'd ever to deal with ;-)... > >> Dan? > >> > > > > I like the -rc2 plan better than sending a pull request based on some > > random point in the middle of the merge window. I can give Linus a > > heads up in my initial nvdimm pull request for -rc1 that for > > coordination purposes we'll be sending this set of follow-on DAX > > cleanups for -rc2. > > So what's still pending for -rc2? I want to be explicit about what I'm > requesting Linus be prepared to receive after -rc1. The libnvdimm pull > request is very light this time around since I ended up deferring the > device-dax-subdivision topic until 4.11 and sub-section memory hotplug > didn't make the cutoff for -mm. We can spend some of that goodwill on > your patches ;-). ;-) So I'd like all these 6 patches to go for rc2. The first three patches fix invalidation of exceptional DAX entries (a bug which is there for a long time) - without these patches data loss can occur on power failure even though user called fsync(2). The other three patches change locking of DAX faults so that ->iomap_begin() is called in a more relaxed locking context and we are safe to start a transaction there for ext4. > I can roll them into libnvdimm-for-next now for the integration > testing coverage, rebase to -rc1 when it's out, wait for your thumbs > up on the testing and send a pull request on the 23rd. Yup, all prerequisites are merged now so you can pick these patches up. Thanks! Note that I'll be on vacation on Dec 23 - Jan 1. Honza -- Jan Kara <jack@xxxxxxxx> SUSE Labs, CR -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-ext4" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
