On Mon, Dec 19, 2016 at 1:56 AM, Jan Kara <jack@xxxxxxx> wrote: > 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. Sounds good, the contents are now out on libnvdimm-pending awaiting 0day-run before moving them over to libnvdimm-for-next, also it's down to 5 patches since it seems that the "dax: Fix sleep in atomic contex in grab_mapping_entry()" change went upstream already. -- 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
