From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Date: Mon, 16 Nov 2015 16:29:27 -0700 From: Ross Zwisler Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 03/11] pmem: enable REQ_FUA/REQ_FLUSH handling Message-ID: <20151116232927.GA5582@linux.intel.com> References: <1447459610-14259-1-git-send-email-ross.zwisler@linux.intel.com> <1447459610-14259-4-git-send-email-ross.zwisler@linux.intel.com> <22E0F870-C1FB-431E-BF6C-B395A09A2B0D@dilger.ca> <20151116133714.GB3443@quack.suse.cz> <20151116140526.GA6733@quack.suse.cz> <20151116221412.GV19199@dastard> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20151116221412.GV19199@dastard> Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org To: Dave Chinner Cc: Jan Kara , Dan Williams , Andreas Dilger , Ross Zwisler , "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" , "H. Peter Anvin" , "J. Bruce Fields" , Theodore Ts'o , Alexander Viro , Ingo Molnar , Jan Kara , Jeff Layton , Matthew Wilcox , Thomas Gleixner , linux-ext4 , linux-fsdevel , Linux MM , "linux-nvdimm@lists.01.org" , X86 ML , XFS Developers , Andrew Morton , Matthew Wilcox , Dave Hansen List-ID: On Tue, Nov 17, 2015 at 09:14:12AM +1100, Dave Chinner wrote: > On Mon, Nov 16, 2015 at 03:05:26PM +0100, Jan Kara wrote: > > On Mon 16-11-15 14:37:14, Jan Kara wrote: > > > On Fri 13-11-15 18:32:40, Dan Williams wrote: > > > > On Fri, Nov 13, 2015 at 4:43 PM, Andreas Dilger wrote: > > > > > On Nov 13, 2015, at 5:20 PM, Dan Williams wrote: > > > > >> > > > > >> On Fri, Nov 13, 2015 at 4:06 PM, Ross Zwisler > > > > >> wrote: > > > > >>> Currently the PMEM driver doesn't accept REQ_FLUSH or REQ_FUA bios. These > > > > >>> are sent down via blkdev_issue_flush() in response to a fsync() or msync() > > > > >>> and are used by filesystems to order their metadata, among other things. > > > > >>> > > > > >>> When we get an msync() or fsync() it is the responsibility of the DAX code > > > > >>> to flush all dirty pages to media. The PMEM driver then just has issue a > > > > >>> wmb_pmem() in response to the REQ_FLUSH to ensure that before we return all > > > > >>> the flushed data has been durably stored on the media. > > > > >>> > > > > >>> Signed-off-by: Ross Zwisler > > > > >> > > > > >> Hmm, I'm not seeing why we need this patch. If the actual flushing of > > > > >> the cache is done by the core why does the driver need support > > > > >> REQ_FLUSH? Especially since it's just a couple instructions. REQ_FUA > > > > >> only makes sense if individual writes can bypass the "drive" cache, > > > > >> but no I/O submitted to the driver proper is ever cached we always > > > > >> flush it through to media. > > > > > > > > > > If the upper level filesystem gets an error when submitting a flush > > > > > request, then it assumes the underlying hardware is broken and cannot > > > > > be as aggressive in IO submission, but instead has to wait for in-flight > > > > > IO to complete. > > > > > > > > Upper level filesystems won't get errors when the driver does not > > > > support flush. Those requests are ended cleanly in > > > > generic_make_request_checks(). Yes, the fs still needs to wait for > > > > outstanding I/O to complete but in the case of pmem all I/O is > > > > synchronous. There's never anything to await when flushing at the > > > > pmem driver level. > > > > > > > > > Since FUA/FLUSH is basically a no-op for pmem devices, > > > > > it doesn't make sense _not_ to support this functionality. > > > > > > > > Seems to be a nop either way. Given that DAX may lead to dirty data > > > > pending to the device in the cpu cache that a REQ_FLUSH request will > > > > not touch, its better to leave it all to the mm core to handle. I.e. > > > > it doesn't make sense to call the driver just for two instructions > > > > (sfence + pcommit) when the mm core is taking on the cache flushing. > > > > Either handle it all in the mm or the driver, not a mixture. > > > > > > So I think REQ_FLUSH requests *must* end up doing sfence + pcommit because > > > e.g. journal writes going through block layer or writes done through > > > dax_do_io() must be on permanent storage once REQ_FLUSH request finishes > > > and the way driver does IO doesn't guarantee this, does it? > > > > Hum, and looking into how dax_do_io() works and what drivers/nvdimm/pmem.c > > does, I'm indeed wrong because they both do wmb_pmem() after each write > > which seems to include sfence + pcommit. Sorry for confusion. > > Which I want to remove, because it makes DAX IO 3x slower than > buffered IO on ramdisk based testing. > > > But a question: Won't it be better to do sfence + pcommit only in response > > to REQ_FLUSH request and don't do it after each write? I'm not sure how > > expensive these instructions are but in theory it could be a performance > > win, couldn't it? For filesystems this is enough wrt persistency > > guarantees... > > I'm pretty sure it would be, because all of the overhead (and > therefore latency) I measured is in the cache flushing instructions. > But before we can remove the wmb_pmem() from dax_do_io(), we need > the underlying device to support REQ_FLUSH correctly... By "support REQ_FLUSH correctly" do you mean call wmb_pmem() as I do in my set? Or do you mean something that also involves cache flushing such as the "big hammer" that flushes everything or something like WBINVD? -- To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in the body to majordomo@kvack.org. For more info on Linux MM, see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ . Don't email: email@kvack.org From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1752396AbbKPX3c (ORCPT ); Mon, 16 Nov 2015 18:29:32 -0500 Received: from mga01.intel.com ([192.55.52.88]:44935 "EHLO mga01.intel.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751261AbbKPX3a (ORCPT ); Mon, 16 Nov 2015 18:29:30 -0500 X-ExtLoop1: 1 X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.20,304,1444719600"; d="scan'208";a="821681064" Date: Mon, 16 Nov 2015 16:29:27 -0700 From: Ross Zwisler To: Dave Chinner Cc: Jan Kara , Dan Williams , Andreas Dilger , Ross Zwisler , "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" , "H. Peter Anvin" , "J. Bruce Fields" , "Theodore Ts'o" , Alexander Viro , Ingo Molnar , Jan Kara , Jeff Layton , Matthew Wilcox , Thomas Gleixner , linux-ext4 , linux-fsdevel , Linux MM , "linux-nvdimm@lists.01.org" , X86 ML , XFS Developers , Andrew Morton , Matthew Wilcox , Dave Hansen Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 03/11] pmem: enable REQ_FUA/REQ_FLUSH handling Message-ID: <20151116232927.GA5582@linux.intel.com> Mail-Followup-To: Ross Zwisler , Dave Chinner , Jan Kara , Dan Williams , Andreas Dilger , "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" , "H. Peter Anvin" , "J. Bruce Fields" , Theodore Ts'o , Alexander Viro , Ingo Molnar , Jan Kara , Jeff Layton , Matthew Wilcox , Thomas Gleixner , linux-ext4 , linux-fsdevel , Linux MM , "linux-nvdimm@lists.01.org" , X86 ML , XFS Developers , Andrew Morton , Matthew Wilcox , Dave Hansen References: <1447459610-14259-1-git-send-email-ross.zwisler@linux.intel.com> <1447459610-14259-4-git-send-email-ross.zwisler@linux.intel.com> <22E0F870-C1FB-431E-BF6C-B395A09A2B0D@dilger.ca> <20151116133714.GB3443@quack.suse.cz> <20151116140526.GA6733@quack.suse.cz> <20151116221412.GV19199@dastard> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20151116221412.GV19199@dastard> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.23 (2014-03-12) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Tue, Nov 17, 2015 at 09:14:12AM +1100, Dave Chinner wrote: > On Mon, Nov 16, 2015 at 03:05:26PM +0100, Jan Kara wrote: > > On Mon 16-11-15 14:37:14, Jan Kara wrote: > > > On Fri 13-11-15 18:32:40, Dan Williams wrote: > > > > On Fri, Nov 13, 2015 at 4:43 PM, Andreas Dilger wrote: > > > > > On Nov 13, 2015, at 5:20 PM, Dan Williams wrote: > > > > >> > > > > >> On Fri, Nov 13, 2015 at 4:06 PM, Ross Zwisler > > > > >> wrote: > > > > >>> Currently the PMEM driver doesn't accept REQ_FLUSH or REQ_FUA bios. These > > > > >>> are sent down via blkdev_issue_flush() in response to a fsync() or msync() > > > > >>> and are used by filesystems to order their metadata, among other things. > > > > >>> > > > > >>> When we get an msync() or fsync() it is the responsibility of the DAX code > > > > >>> to flush all dirty pages to media. The PMEM driver then just has issue a > > > > >>> wmb_pmem() in response to the REQ_FLUSH to ensure that before we return all > > > > >>> the flushed data has been durably stored on the media. > > > > >>> > > > > >>> Signed-off-by: Ross Zwisler > > > > >> > > > > >> Hmm, I'm not seeing why we need this patch. If the actual flushing of > > > > >> the cache is done by the core why does the driver need support > > > > >> REQ_FLUSH? Especially since it's just a couple instructions. REQ_FUA > > > > >> only makes sense if individual writes can bypass the "drive" cache, > > > > >> but no I/O submitted to the driver proper is ever cached we always > > > > >> flush it through to media. > > > > > > > > > > If the upper level filesystem gets an error when submitting a flush > > > > > request, then it assumes the underlying hardware is broken and cannot > > > > > be as aggressive in IO submission, but instead has to wait for in-flight > > > > > IO to complete. > > > > > > > > Upper level filesystems won't get errors when the driver does not > > > > support flush. Those requests are ended cleanly in > > > > generic_make_request_checks(). Yes, the fs still needs to wait for > > > > outstanding I/O to complete but in the case of pmem all I/O is > > > > synchronous. There's never anything to await when flushing at the > > > > pmem driver level. > > > > > > > > > Since FUA/FLUSH is basically a no-op for pmem devices, > > > > > it doesn't make sense _not_ to support this functionality. > > > > > > > > Seems to be a nop either way. Given that DAX may lead to dirty data > > > > pending to the device in the cpu cache that a REQ_FLUSH request will > > > > not touch, its better to leave it all to the mm core to handle. I.e. > > > > it doesn't make sense to call the driver just for two instructions > > > > (sfence + pcommit) when the mm core is taking on the cache flushing. > > > > Either handle it all in the mm or the driver, not a mixture. > > > > > > So I think REQ_FLUSH requests *must* end up doing sfence + pcommit because > > > e.g. journal writes going through block layer or writes done through > > > dax_do_io() must be on permanent storage once REQ_FLUSH request finishes > > > and the way driver does IO doesn't guarantee this, does it? > > > > Hum, and looking into how dax_do_io() works and what drivers/nvdimm/pmem.c > > does, I'm indeed wrong because they both do wmb_pmem() after each write > > which seems to include sfence + pcommit. Sorry for confusion. > > Which I want to remove, because it makes DAX IO 3x slower than > buffered IO on ramdisk based testing. > > > But a question: Won't it be better to do sfence + pcommit only in response > > to REQ_FLUSH request and don't do it after each write? I'm not sure how > > expensive these instructions are but in theory it could be a performance > > win, couldn't it? For filesystems this is enough wrt persistency > > guarantees... > > I'm pretty sure it would be, because all of the overhead (and > therefore latency) I measured is in the cache flushing instructions. > But before we can remove the wmb_pmem() from dax_do_io(), we need > the underlying device to support REQ_FLUSH correctly... By "support REQ_FLUSH correctly" do you mean call wmb_pmem() as I do in my set? Or do you mean something that also involves cache flushing such as the "big hammer" that flushes everything or something like WBINVD? From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Ross Zwisler Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 03/11] pmem: enable REQ_FUA/REQ_FLUSH handling Date: Mon, 16 Nov 2015 16:29:27 -0700 Message-ID: <20151116232927.GA5582@linux.intel.com> References: <1447459610-14259-1-git-send-email-ross.zwisler@linux.intel.com> <1447459610-14259-4-git-send-email-ross.zwisler@linux.intel.com> <22E0F870-C1FB-431E-BF6C-B395A09A2B0D@dilger.ca> <20151116133714.GB3443@quack.suse.cz> <20151116140526.GA6733@quack.suse.cz> <20151116221412.GV19199@dastard> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Cc: Jan Kara , Dan Williams , Andreas Dilger , Ross Zwisler , "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" , "H. Peter Anvin" , "J. Bruce Fields" , Theodore Ts'o , Alexander Viro , Ingo Molnar , Jan Kara , Jeff Layton , Matthew Wilcox , Thomas Gleixner , linux-ext4 , linux-fsdevel , Linux MM , "linux-nvdimm@lists.01.org" , X86 ML , XFS Developers , Andrew Morton , Matthew Wilcox , Dave Hansen Return-path: Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20151116221412.GV19199@dastard> Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org List-Id: linux-ext4.vger.kernel.org On Tue, Nov 17, 2015 at 09:14:12AM +1100, Dave Chinner wrote: > On Mon, Nov 16, 2015 at 03:05:26PM +0100, Jan Kara wrote: > > On Mon 16-11-15 14:37:14, Jan Kara wrote: > > > On Fri 13-11-15 18:32:40, Dan Williams wrote: > > > > On Fri, Nov 13, 2015 at 4:43 PM, Andreas Dilger wrote: > > > > > On Nov 13, 2015, at 5:20 PM, Dan Williams wrote: > > > > >> > > > > >> On Fri, Nov 13, 2015 at 4:06 PM, Ross Zwisler > > > > >> wrote: > > > > >>> Currently the PMEM driver doesn't accept REQ_FLUSH or REQ_FUA bios. These > > > > >>> are sent down via blkdev_issue_flush() in response to a fsync() or msync() > > > > >>> and are used by filesystems to order their metadata, among other things. > > > > >>> > > > > >>> When we get an msync() or fsync() it is the responsibility of the DAX code > > > > >>> to flush all dirty pages to media. The PMEM driver then just has issue a > > > > >>> wmb_pmem() in response to the REQ_FLUSH to ensure that before we return all > > > > >>> the flushed data has been durably stored on the media. > > > > >>> > > > > >>> Signed-off-by: Ross Zwisler > > > > >> > > > > >> Hmm, I'm not seeing why we need this patch. If the actual flushing of > > > > >> the cache is done by the core why does the driver need support > > > > >> REQ_FLUSH? Especially since it's just a couple instructions. REQ_FUA > > > > >> only makes sense if individual writes can bypass the "drive" cache, > > > > >> but no I/O submitted to the driver proper is ever cached we always > > > > >> flush it through to media. > > > > > > > > > > If the upper level filesystem gets an error when submitting a flush > > > > > request, then it assumes the underlying hardware is broken and cannot > > > > > be as aggressive in IO submission, but instead has to wait for in-flight > > > > > IO to complete. > > > > > > > > Upper level filesystems won't get errors when the driver does not > > > > support flush. Those requests are ended cleanly in > > > > generic_make_request_checks(). Yes, the fs still needs to wait for > > > > outstanding I/O to complete but in the case of pmem all I/O is > > > > synchronous. There's never anything to await when flushing at the > > > > pmem driver level. > > > > > > > > > Since FUA/FLUSH is basically a no-op for pmem devices, > > > > > it doesn't make sense _not_ to support this functionality. > > > > > > > > Seems to be a nop either way. Given that DAX may lead to dirty data > > > > pending to the device in the cpu cache that a REQ_FLUSH request will > > > > not touch, its better to leave it all to the mm core to handle. I.e. > > > > it doesn't make sense to call the driver just for two instructions > > > > (sfence + pcommit) when the mm core is taking on the cache flushing. > > > > Either handle it all in the mm or the driver, not a mixture. > > > > > > So I think REQ_FLUSH requests *must* end up doing sfence + pcommit because > > > e.g. journal writes going through block layer or writes done through > > > dax_do_io() must be on permanent storage once REQ_FLUSH request finishes > > > and the way driver does IO doesn't guarantee this, does it? > > > > Hum, and looking into how dax_do_io() works and what drivers/nvdimm/pmem.c > > does, I'm indeed wrong because they both do wmb_pmem() after each write > > which seems to include sfence + pcommit. Sorry for confusion. > > Which I want to remove, because it makes DAX IO 3x slower than > buffered IO on ramdisk based testing. > > > But a question: Won't it be better to do sfence + pcommit only in response > > to REQ_FLUSH request and don't do it after each write? I'm not sure how > > expensive these instructions are but in theory it could be a performance > > win, couldn't it? For filesystems this is enough wrt persistency > > guarantees... > > I'm pretty sure it would be, because all of the overhead (and > therefore latency) I measured is in the cache flushing instructions. > But before we can remove the wmb_pmem() from dax_do_io(), we need > the underlying device to support REQ_FLUSH correctly... By "support REQ_FLUSH correctly" do you mean call wmb_pmem() as I do in my set? Or do you mean something that also involves cache flushing such as the "big hammer" that flushes everything or something like WBINVD? -- To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in the body to majordomo@kvack.org. For more info on Linux MM, see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ . Don't email: email@kvack.org From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from relay.sgi.com (relay2.corp.sgi.com [137.38.102.29]) by oss.sgi.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2CF5F7F4E for ; Mon, 16 Nov 2015 17:29:35 -0600 (CST) Received: from cuda.sgi.com (cuda2.sgi.com [192.48.176.25]) by relay2.corp.sgi.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0D851304043 for ; Mon, 16 Nov 2015 15:29:31 -0800 (PST) Received: from mga11.intel.com ([192.55.52.93]) by cuda.sgi.com with ESMTP id D6YYgepJbHbblwqn for ; Mon, 16 Nov 2015 15:29:30 -0800 (PST) Date: Mon, 16 Nov 2015 16:29:27 -0700 From: Ross Zwisler Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 03/11] pmem: enable REQ_FUA/REQ_FLUSH handling Message-ID: <20151116232927.GA5582@linux.intel.com> References: <1447459610-14259-1-git-send-email-ross.zwisler@linux.intel.com> <1447459610-14259-4-git-send-email-ross.zwisler@linux.intel.com> <22E0F870-C1FB-431E-BF6C-B395A09A2B0D@dilger.ca> <20151116133714.GB3443@quack.suse.cz> <20151116140526.GA6733@quack.suse.cz> <20151116221412.GV19199@dastard> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20151116221412.GV19199@dastard> List-Id: XFS Filesystem from SGI List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Errors-To: xfs-bounces@oss.sgi.com Sender: xfs-bounces@oss.sgi.com To: Dave Chinner Cc: Jan Kara , Dave Hansen , "J. Bruce Fields" , Linux MM , "H. Peter Anvin" , Jeff Layton , Dan Williams , "linux-nvdimm@lists.01.org" , X86 ML , Ingo Molnar , Matthew Wilcox , Ross Zwisler , linux-ext4 , XFS Developers , Alexander Viro , Thomas Gleixner , Andreas Dilger , Theodore Ts'o , "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" , Jan Kara , linux-fsdevel , Andrew Morton , Matthew Wilcox On Tue, Nov 17, 2015 at 09:14:12AM +1100, Dave Chinner wrote: > On Mon, Nov 16, 2015 at 03:05:26PM +0100, Jan Kara wrote: > > On Mon 16-11-15 14:37:14, Jan Kara wrote: > > > On Fri 13-11-15 18:32:40, Dan Williams wrote: > > > > On Fri, Nov 13, 2015 at 4:43 PM, Andreas Dilger wrote: > > > > > On Nov 13, 2015, at 5:20 PM, Dan Williams wrote: > > > > >> > > > > >> On Fri, Nov 13, 2015 at 4:06 PM, Ross Zwisler > > > > >> wrote: > > > > >>> Currently the PMEM driver doesn't accept REQ_FLUSH or REQ_FUA bios. These > > > > >>> are sent down via blkdev_issue_flush() in response to a fsync() or msync() > > > > >>> and are used by filesystems to order their metadata, among other things. > > > > >>> > > > > >>> When we get an msync() or fsync() it is the responsibility of the DAX code > > > > >>> to flush all dirty pages to media. The PMEM driver then just has issue a > > > > >>> wmb_pmem() in response to the REQ_FLUSH to ensure that before we return all > > > > >>> the flushed data has been durably stored on the media. > > > > >>> > > > > >>> Signed-off-by: Ross Zwisler > > > > >> > > > > >> Hmm, I'm not seeing why we need this patch. If the actual flushing of > > > > >> the cache is done by the core why does the driver need support > > > > >> REQ_FLUSH? Especially since it's just a couple instructions. REQ_FUA > > > > >> only makes sense if individual writes can bypass the "drive" cache, > > > > >> but no I/O submitted to the driver proper is ever cached we always > > > > >> flush it through to media. > > > > > > > > > > If the upper level filesystem gets an error when submitting a flush > > > > > request, then it assumes the underlying hardware is broken and cannot > > > > > be as aggressive in IO submission, but instead has to wait for in-flight > > > > > IO to complete. > > > > > > > > Upper level filesystems won't get errors when the driver does not > > > > support flush. Those requests are ended cleanly in > > > > generic_make_request_checks(). Yes, the fs still needs to wait for > > > > outstanding I/O to complete but in the case of pmem all I/O is > > > > synchronous. There's never anything to await when flushing at the > > > > pmem driver level. > > > > > > > > > Since FUA/FLUSH is basically a no-op for pmem devices, > > > > > it doesn't make sense _not_ to support this functionality. > > > > > > > > Seems to be a nop either way. Given that DAX may lead to dirty data > > > > pending to the device in the cpu cache that a REQ_FLUSH request will > > > > not touch, its better to leave it all to the mm core to handle. I.e. > > > > it doesn't make sense to call the driver just for two instructions > > > > (sfence + pcommit) when the mm core is taking on the cache flushing. > > > > Either handle it all in the mm or the driver, not a mixture. > > > > > > So I think REQ_FLUSH requests *must* end up doing sfence + pcommit because > > > e.g. journal writes going through block layer or writes done through > > > dax_do_io() must be on permanent storage once REQ_FLUSH request finishes > > > and the way driver does IO doesn't guarantee this, does it? > > > > Hum, and looking into how dax_do_io() works and what drivers/nvdimm/pmem.c > > does, I'm indeed wrong because they both do wmb_pmem() after each write > > which seems to include sfence + pcommit. Sorry for confusion. > > Which I want to remove, because it makes DAX IO 3x slower than > buffered IO on ramdisk based testing. > > > But a question: Won't it be better to do sfence + pcommit only in response > > to REQ_FLUSH request and don't do it after each write? I'm not sure how > > expensive these instructions are but in theory it could be a performance > > win, couldn't it? For filesystems this is enough wrt persistency > > guarantees... > > I'm pretty sure it would be, because all of the overhead (and > therefore latency) I measured is in the cache flushing instructions. > But before we can remove the wmb_pmem() from dax_do_io(), we need > the underlying device to support REQ_FLUSH correctly... By "support REQ_FLUSH correctly" do you mean call wmb_pmem() as I do in my set? Or do you mean something that also involves cache flushing such as the "big hammer" that flushes everything or something like WBINVD? _______________________________________________ xfs mailing list xfs@oss.sgi.com http://oss.sgi.com/mailman/listinfo/xfs