On Thu, Oct 29, 2015 at 02:12:04PM -0600, Ross Zwisler wrote: > This patch series adds support for fsync/msync to DAX. > > Patches 1 through 8 add various utilities that the DAX code will eventually > need, and the DAX code itself is added by patch 9. Patches 10 and 11 are > filesystem changes that are needed after the DAX code is added, but these > patches may change slightly as the filesystem fault handling for DAX is > being modified ([1] and [2]). > > I've marked this series as RFC because I'm still testing, but I wanted to > get this out there so people would see the direction I was going and > hopefully comment on any big red flags sooner rather than later. > > I realize that we are getting pretty dang close to the v4.4 merge window, > but I think that if we can get this reviewed and working it's a much better > solution than the "big hammer" approach that blindly flushes entire PMEM > namespaces [3]. > > [1] http://oss.sgi.com/archives/xfs/2015-10/msg00523.html > [2] http://marc.info/?l=linux-ext4&m=144550211312472&w=2 > [3] https://lists.01.org/pipermail/linux-nvdimm/2015-October/002614.html Hmm...I think I may need to isolate the fsync/msync flushing against races with truncate since we are calling into the filesystem directly with get_block(). Dave (Chinner), does this sound right? Also, one thing I forgot to mention is that these patches are built upon the first version of Dave Chinner's XFS patches and my ext2 patches that deal with the truncate races with DAX. A snapshot of my development tree with these patches applied can be found here: https://github.com/01org/prd/tree/fsync_rfc -- 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>