On Thu, 2018-06-28 at 13:48 -0400, Mike Snitzer wrote:
> On Thu, Jun 28 2018 at 1:42pm -0400,
> Kani, Toshi <toshi.kani@xxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> > On Tue, 2018-06-26 at 16:04 -0600, Ross Zwisler wrote:
> > > On Tue, Jun 26, 2018 at 02:51:52PM -0700, Dan Williams wrote:
> > > > On Tue, Jun 26, 2018 at 2:31 PM, Kani, Toshi <toshi.kani@xxxxxxx> wrote:
> > > > > On Tue, 2018-06-26 at 14:28 -0700, Dan Williams wrote:
> > > > > > On Tue, Jun 26, 2018 at 2:23 PM, Kani, Toshi <toshi.kani@xxxxxxx> wrote:
> > > > > > > On Tue, 2018-06-26 at 14:02 -0700, Dan Williams wrote:
> > > > > > > > On Tue, Jun 26, 2018 at 1:54 PM, Kani, Toshi <toshi.kani@xxxxxxx> wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > [..]
> > > > > > > > > When this dm change was made, the pmem driver supported DAX for both raw
> > > > > > > > > and memory modes (note: sector mode does not use the pmem driver). I
> > > > > > > > > think the issue was introduced when we dropped DAX support from raw
> > > > > > > > > mode.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Still DAX with raw mode never really worked any way. It was also
> > > > > > > > something that was broken from day one. So what happens to someone who
> > > > > > > > happened to avoid all the problems with page-less DAX and enabled
> > > > > > > > device-mapper on top? That failure mode detail needs to be added to
> > > > > > > > this changelog if we want to propose this for -stable.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > My point is that the behavior should be consistent between pmem and
> > > > > > > device-mapper. When -o dax succeeds on a pmem, then it should succeed
> > > > > > > on a device-mapper on top of that pmem.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Has the drop of dax support from raw mode made to -stable back to the
> > > > > > > baseline accepted 545ed20e6df6? It will introduce inconsistency,
> > > > > > > otherwise.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > That commit, 569d0365f571 "dax: require 'struct page' by default for
> > > > > > filesystem dax", has not been tagged for -stable.
> > > > >
> > > > > Then, Fixes tag should be set to 569d0365f571 to keep the behavior
> > > > > consistent.
> > > >
> > > > Sure, and the failure mode is...? I'm thinking the commit log should say:
> > > >
> > > > "Starting with commit 569d0365f571 "dax: require 'struct page' by
> > > > default for filesystem dax", dax is no longer supported for page-less
> > > > configurations. However, device-mapper sees the QUEUE_FLAG_DAX still
> > > > being set and falsely assumes that DAX is enabled, this leads to
> > > > <insert user visible failure mode details here>"
> > >
> > > Dan is correct that there is no user visible change for this. It is the right
> > > thing to do for consistency and sanity, but it doesn't actually have user
> > > visible behavior that needs to be backported to stable.
> > >
> > > Toshi is correct that this change is only for raw mode namespaces, not btt
> > > namespaces.
> > >
> > > I'll adjust the changelog and remove the stable flag for v5, and I'll add a
> > > Fixes: tag for patch 2.
> >
> > Hi Ross,
> >
> > Your patches look good. But I am still not clear about the Fixes &
> > stable handling. Talking about user visible behavior, I do not think we
> > had any issue until dax support was dropped from raw mode. Until then,
> > the pmem driver supported dax for all modes, and the check for
> > direct_access worked.
>
> I've staged the changes to send to Linus shortly.
>
> The first patch has:
>
> Fixes: 569d0365f571 ("dax: require 'struct page' by default for filesystem dax")
> Cc: stable@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>
> As that is the right thing to do given the other 2 patches are marked
> for stable. We don't want to have a stable kernel with the last 2
> patches but not the first.
Agreed.
Technically, all 3 patches may have "Fixes: 569d0365f571 dax..", but I
think having "Fixes 545ed20e6df6 dm.." for patch 2 & 3 provide a
protection in case 569d0365f571 gets backported in future.
For the series:
Reviewed-by: Toshi Kani <toshi.kani@xxxxxxx>
Thanks,
-Toshi
��.n��������+%������w��{.n�����{����� jg��� �����ݢj����G���� ���j:+v���w�m������w�������h�����٥
