----- Original Message -----
> From: "Matthew Wilcox" <willy@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> To: "Mathieu Desnoyers" <mathieu.desnoyers@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
> Cc: "Matthew Wilcox" <matthew.r.wilcox@xxxxxxxxx>, linux-fsdevel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, linux-mm@xxxxxxxxx,
> linux-kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, "Ross Zwisler" <ross.zwisler@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> Sent: Friday, October 17, 2014 12:16:24 AM
> Subject: Re: [PATCH v11 20/21] ext4: Add DAX functionality
>
[...]
> On Thu, Oct 16, 2014 at 02:56:25PM +0200, Mathieu Desnoyers wrote:
> > > @@ -3572,6 +3579,11 @@ static int ext4_fill_super(struct super_block *sb,
> > > void *data, int silent)
> > > "both data=journal and dioread_nolock");
> > > goto failed_mount;
> > > }
> > > + if (test_opt(sb, DAX)) {
> > > + ext4_msg(sb, KERN_ERR, "can't mount with "
> > > + "both data=journal and dax");
> >
> > This limitation regarding ext4 and dax should be documented in dax
> > Documentation.
>
> Maybe the ext4 documentation too? It seems kind of obvious to me that if
> ypu're enabling in-place-updates that you can't journal the data you're
> updating (well ... you could implement undo-log journalling, I suppose,
> which would be quite a change for ext4)
Yes, we could document this limitation in general for all journalling FS within
DAX documentation, and then document it specifically per-FS in the FS
documentation.
Thanks,
Mathieu
--
Mathieu Desnoyers
EfficiOS Inc.
http://www.efficios.com
--
To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in
the body to majordomo@xxxxxxxxx. For more info on Linux MM,
see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ .
Don't email: <a href=mailto:"dont@xxxxxxxxx";> email@xxxxxxxxx </a>