From: Vivek Goyal <vgoyal@redhat.com> To: Dan Williams <dan.j.williams@intel.com> Cc: linux-fsdevel <linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org>, linux-nvdimm <linux-nvdimm@lists.01.org>, Christoph Hellwig <hch@infradead.org>, device-mapper development <dm-devel@redhat.com>, Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de> Subject: Re: [PATCH v5 4/8] dax, pmem: Add a dax operation zero_page_range Date: Wed, 1 Apr 2020 12:14:16 -0400 [thread overview] Message-ID: <20200401161416.GC9398@redhat.com> (raw) In-Reply-To: <CAPcyv4jKHxy5c8BZodePeCu5+Z=cwhtEfw3RnOD1ZDNob382bQ@mail.gmail.com> On Tue, Mar 31, 2020 at 12:38:16PM -0700, Dan Williams wrote: > On Tue, Feb 18, 2020 at 1:49 PM Vivek Goyal <vgoyal@redhat.com> wrote: > > > > Add a dax operation zero_page_range, to zero a range of memory. This will > > also clear any poison in the range being zeroed. > > > > As of now, zeroing of up to one page is allowed in a single call. There > > are no callers which are trying to zero more than a page in a single call. > > Once we grow the callers which zero more than a page in single call, we > > can add that support. Primary reason for not doing that yet is that this > > will add little complexity in dm implementation where a range might be > > spanning multiple underlying targets and one will have to split the range > > into multiple sub ranges and call zero_page_range() on individual targets. > > > > Suggested-by: Christoph Hellwig <hch@infradead.org> > > Reviewed-by: Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de> > > Signed-off-by: Vivek Goyal <vgoyal@redhat.com> > > --- > > drivers/dax/super.c | 19 +++++++++++++++++++ > > drivers/nvdimm/pmem.c | 10 ++++++++++ > > include/linux/dax.h | 3 +++ > > 3 files changed, 32 insertions(+) > > > > diff --git a/drivers/dax/super.c b/drivers/dax/super.c > > index 0aa4b6bc5101..c912808bc886 100644 > > --- a/drivers/dax/super.c > > +++ b/drivers/dax/super.c > > @@ -344,6 +344,25 @@ size_t dax_copy_to_iter(struct dax_device *dax_dev, pgoff_t pgoff, void *addr, > > } > > EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(dax_copy_to_iter); > > > > +int dax_zero_page_range(struct dax_device *dax_dev, u64 offset, size_t len) > > +{ > > + if (!dax_alive(dax_dev)) > > + return -ENXIO; > > + > > + if (!dax_dev->ops->zero_page_range) > > + return -EOPNOTSUPP; > > This seems too late to be doing the validation. It would be odd for > random filesystem operations to see this error. I would move the check > to alloc_dax() and fail that if the caller fails to implement the > operation. > > An incremental patch on top to fix this up would be ok. Something like > "Now that all dax_operations providers implement zero_page_range() > mandate it at alloc_dax time". Hi Dan, Posted an extra patch in same patch series for this. https://lore.kernel.org/linux-fsdevel/20200228163456.1587-1-vgoyal@redhat.com/T/#m624680cbb5e714266d4b34ade2d6c390dae69598 Vivek > _______________________________________________ Linux-nvdimm mailing list -- linux-nvdimm@lists.01.org To unsubscribe send an email to linux-nvdimm-leave@lists.01.org
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Vivek Goyal <vgoyal@redhat.com> To: Dan Williams <dan.j.williams@intel.com> Cc: linux-fsdevel <linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org>, linux-nvdimm <linux-nvdimm@lists.01.org>, Christoph Hellwig <hch@infradead.org>, device-mapper development <dm-devel@redhat.com>, Vishal L Verma <vishal.l.verma@intel.com>, Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de> Subject: Re: [PATCH v5 4/8] dax, pmem: Add a dax operation zero_page_range Date: Wed, 1 Apr 2020 12:14:16 -0400 [thread overview] Message-ID: <20200401161416.GC9398@redhat.com> (raw) In-Reply-To: <CAPcyv4jKHxy5c8BZodePeCu5+Z=cwhtEfw3RnOD1ZDNob382bQ@mail.gmail.com> On Tue, Mar 31, 2020 at 12:38:16PM -0700, Dan Williams wrote: > On Tue, Feb 18, 2020 at 1:49 PM Vivek Goyal <vgoyal@redhat.com> wrote: > > > > Add a dax operation zero_page_range, to zero a range of memory. This will > > also clear any poison in the range being zeroed. > > > > As of now, zeroing of up to one page is allowed in a single call. There > > are no callers which are trying to zero more than a page in a single call. > > Once we grow the callers which zero more than a page in single call, we > > can add that support. Primary reason for not doing that yet is that this > > will add little complexity in dm implementation where a range might be > > spanning multiple underlying targets and one will have to split the range > > into multiple sub ranges and call zero_page_range() on individual targets. > > > > Suggested-by: Christoph Hellwig <hch@infradead.org> > > Reviewed-by: Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de> > > Signed-off-by: Vivek Goyal <vgoyal@redhat.com> > > --- > > drivers/dax/super.c | 19 +++++++++++++++++++ > > drivers/nvdimm/pmem.c | 10 ++++++++++ > > include/linux/dax.h | 3 +++ > > 3 files changed, 32 insertions(+) > > > > diff --git a/drivers/dax/super.c b/drivers/dax/super.c > > index 0aa4b6bc5101..c912808bc886 100644 > > --- a/drivers/dax/super.c > > +++ b/drivers/dax/super.c > > @@ -344,6 +344,25 @@ size_t dax_copy_to_iter(struct dax_device *dax_dev, pgoff_t pgoff, void *addr, > > } > > EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(dax_copy_to_iter); > > > > +int dax_zero_page_range(struct dax_device *dax_dev, u64 offset, size_t len) > > +{ > > + if (!dax_alive(dax_dev)) > > + return -ENXIO; > > + > > + if (!dax_dev->ops->zero_page_range) > > + return -EOPNOTSUPP; > > This seems too late to be doing the validation. It would be odd for > random filesystem operations to see this error. I would move the check > to alloc_dax() and fail that if the caller fails to implement the > operation. > > An incremental patch on top to fix this up would be ok. Something like > "Now that all dax_operations providers implement zero_page_range() > mandate it at alloc_dax time". Hi Dan, Posted an extra patch in same patch series for this. https://lore.kernel.org/linux-fsdevel/20200228163456.1587-1-vgoyal@redhat.com/T/#m624680cbb5e714266d4b34ade2d6c390dae69598 Vivek >
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2020-04-01 16:14 UTC|newest] Thread overview: 103+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top 2020-02-18 21:48 [PATCH v5 0/8] dax/pmem: Provide a dax operation to zero range of memory Vivek Goyal 2020-02-18 21:48 ` Vivek Goyal 2020-02-18 21:48 ` [PATCH v5 1/8] pmem: Add functions for reading/writing page to/from pmem Vivek Goyal 2020-02-18 21:48 ` Vivek Goyal 2020-02-18 21:48 ` [PATCH v5 2/8] drivers/pmem: Allow pmem_clear_poison() to accept arbitrary offset and len Vivek Goyal 2020-02-18 21:48 ` Vivek Goyal 2020-02-20 16:17 ` Christoph Hellwig 2020-02-20 16:17 ` Christoph Hellwig 2020-02-20 21:35 ` Jeff Moyer 2020-02-20 21:35 ` Jeff Moyer 2020-02-20 21:57 ` Vivek Goyal 2020-02-20 21:57 ` Vivek Goyal 2020-02-21 18:32 ` Jeff Moyer 2020-02-21 18:32 ` Jeff Moyer 2020-02-21 20:17 ` Vivek Goyal 2020-02-21 20:17 ` Vivek Goyal 2020-02-21 21:00 ` Dan Williams 2020-02-21 21:00 ` Dan Williams 2020-02-21 21:24 ` Vivek Goyal 2020-02-21 21:24 ` Vivek Goyal 2020-02-21 21:30 ` Dan Williams 2020-02-21 21:30 ` Dan Williams 2020-02-21 21:33 ` Jeff Moyer 2020-02-21 21:33 ` Jeff Moyer 2020-02-23 23:03 ` Dave Chinner 2020-02-23 23:03 ` Dave Chinner 2020-02-24 0:40 ` Dan Williams 2020-02-24 0:40 ` Dan Williams 2020-02-24 13:50 ` Jeff Moyer 2020-02-24 13:50 ` Jeff Moyer 2020-02-24 20:48 ` Dan Williams 2020-02-24 20:48 ` Dan Williams 2020-02-24 21:53 ` Jeff Moyer 2020-02-24 21:53 ` Jeff Moyer 2020-02-25 0:26 ` Dan Williams 2020-02-25 0:26 ` Dan Williams 2020-02-25 20:32 ` Jeff Moyer 2020-02-25 20:32 ` Jeff Moyer 2020-02-25 21:52 ` Dan Williams 2020-02-25 21:52 ` Dan Williams 2020-02-25 23:26 ` Jane Chu 2020-02-25 23:26 ` Jane Chu 2020-02-24 15:38 ` Vivek Goyal 2020-02-24 15:38 ` Vivek Goyal 2020-02-27 3:02 ` Dave Chinner 2020-02-27 3:02 ` Dave Chinner 2020-02-27 4:19 ` Dan Williams 2020-02-27 4:19 ` Dan Williams 2020-02-28 1:30 ` Dave Chinner 2020-02-28 1:30 ` Dave Chinner 2020-02-28 3:28 ` Dan Williams 2020-02-28 3:28 ` Dan Williams 2020-02-28 14:05 ` Christoph Hellwig 2020-02-28 14:05 ` Christoph Hellwig 2020-02-28 16:26 ` Dan Williams 2020-02-28 16:26 ` Dan Williams 2020-02-24 20:13 ` Vivek Goyal 2020-02-24 20:13 ` Vivek Goyal 2020-02-24 20:52 ` Dan Williams 2020-02-24 20:52 ` Dan Williams 2020-02-24 21:15 ` Vivek Goyal 2020-02-24 21:15 ` Vivek Goyal 2020-02-24 21:32 ` Dan Williams 2020-02-24 21:32 ` Dan Williams 2020-02-25 13:36 ` Vivek Goyal 2020-02-25 13:36 ` Vivek Goyal 2020-02-25 16:25 ` Dan Williams 2020-02-25 16:25 ` Dan Williams 2020-02-25 20:08 ` Vivek Goyal 2020-02-25 20:08 ` Vivek Goyal 2020-02-25 22:49 ` Dan Williams 2020-02-25 22:49 ` Dan Williams 2020-02-26 13:51 ` Vivek Goyal 2020-02-26 13:51 ` Vivek Goyal 2020-02-26 16:57 ` Vivek Goyal 2020-02-26 16:57 ` Vivek Goyal 2020-02-27 3:11 ` Dave Chinner 2020-02-27 3:11 ` Dave Chinner 2020-02-27 15:25 ` Vivek Goyal 2020-02-27 15:25 ` Vivek Goyal 2020-02-28 1:50 ` Dave Chinner 2020-02-28 1:50 ` Dave Chinner 2020-02-18 21:48 ` [PATCH v5 3/8] pmem: Enable pmem_do_write() to deal with arbitrary ranges Vivek Goyal 2020-02-18 21:48 ` Vivek Goyal 2020-02-20 16:17 ` Christoph Hellwig 2020-02-20 16:17 ` Christoph Hellwig 2020-02-18 21:48 ` [PATCH v5 4/8] dax, pmem: Add a dax operation zero_page_range Vivek Goyal 2020-02-18 21:48 ` Vivek Goyal 2020-03-31 19:38 ` Dan Williams 2020-03-31 19:38 ` Dan Williams 2020-04-01 13:15 ` Vivek Goyal 2020-04-01 13:15 ` Vivek Goyal 2020-04-01 16:14 ` Vivek Goyal [this message] 2020-04-01 16:14 ` Vivek Goyal 2020-02-18 21:48 ` [PATCH v5 5/8] s390,dcssblk,dax: Add dax zero_page_range operation to dcssblk driver Vivek Goyal 2020-02-18 21:48 ` Vivek Goyal 2020-02-18 21:48 ` [PATCH v5 6/8] dm,dax: Add dax zero_page_range operation Vivek Goyal 2020-02-18 21:48 ` Vivek Goyal 2020-02-18 21:48 ` [PATCH v5 7/8] dax,iomap: Start using dax native zero_page_range() Vivek Goyal 2020-02-18 21:48 ` Vivek Goyal 2020-02-18 21:48 ` [PATCH v5 8/8] dax,iomap: Add helper dax_iomap_zero() to zero a range Vivek Goyal 2020-02-18 21:48 ` Vivek Goyal 2020-04-25 11:31 ` [PATCH v5 8/8] dax, iomap: " neolift9
Reply instructions: You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email using any one of the following methods: * Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client, and reply-to-all from there: mbox Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style * Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to switches of git-send-email(1): git send-email \ --in-reply-to=20200401161416.GC9398@redhat.com \ --to=vgoyal@redhat.com \ --cc=dan.j.williams@intel.com \ --cc=dm-devel@redhat.com \ --cc=hch@infradead.org \ --cc=hch@lst.de \ --cc=linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org \ --cc=linux-nvdimm@lists.01.org \ /path/to/YOUR_REPLY https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html * If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header via mailto: links, try the mailto: linkBe sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes, see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror all data and code used by this external index.