On Tue, 2016-06-21 at 09:45 -0700, Dan Williams wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 21, 2016 at 9:35 AM, Kani, Toshimitsu <toshi.kani@xxxxxxx>
> wrote:
> > On Tue, 2016-06-21 at 09:25 -0700, Dan Williams wrote:
> > > On Tue, Jun 21, 2016 at 8:44 AM, Kani, Toshimitsu <toshi.kani@xxxxxxx>
> > > wrote:
> > > >
:
> > > > I think GENHD_FL_DAX is more appropriate since DAX does not use a
> > > > request queue, except for protecting the underlining device being
> > > > disabled while direct_access() is called (b2e0d1625e19).
> > > >
> > > > About protecting direct_access, this patch assumes that the
> > > > underlining device cannot be disabled until dtr() is called. Is this
> > > > correct? If not, I will need to call dax_map_atomic().
> > >
> > > Kernel internal usages of dax should be using dax_map_atomic() to
> > > safely resolve device removal races.
> >
> > Will do. In such case, shall I move dax_[un]map_atomic() to block_dev.c
> > and rename them to bdev_dax_[un]map_atomic()?
>
> Sounds good to me. I know Jeff and Christoph don't like the current
> calling convention of passing in a structure. Just note that they
> might ask you to change it back to a list of parameters if it moves to
> bdev_dax_map_atomic().
OK, I will change it back to a list of parameters as well.
Thanks,
-Toshi��.n��������+%������w��{.n�����{����w��ܨ}���Ơz�j:+v�����w����ޙ��&�)ߡ�a����z�ޗ���ݢj��w�f
