Return-Path: <linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org>
Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand
	id S1755273AbbGCTHL (ORCPT <rfc822;w@1wt.eu>);
	Fri, 3 Jul 2015 15:07:11 -0400
Received: from imap.thunk.org ([74.207.234.97]:39146 "EHLO imap.thunk.org"
	rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP
	id S1755062AbbGCTHF (ORCPT <rfc822;linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>);
	Fri, 3 Jul 2015 15:07:05 -0400
Date: Fri, 3 Jul 2015 15:07:03 -0400
From: "Theodore Ts'o" <tytso@mit.edu>
To: Matthew Wilcox <willy@linux.intel.com>
Cc: Matthew Wilcox <matthew.r.wilcox@intel.com>, linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org,
        linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Alexander Viro <viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk>,
        Andreas Dilger <adilger.kernel@dilger.ca>, linux-ext4@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 3/6] ext4: Use ext4_get_block_write() for DAX
Message-ID: <20150703190703.GK9456@thunk.org>
Mail-Followup-To: Theodore Ts'o <tytso@mit.edu>,
	Matthew Wilcox <willy@linux.intel.com>,
	Matthew Wilcox <matthew.r.wilcox@intel.com>,
	linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
	Alexander Viro <viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk>,
	Andreas Dilger <adilger.kernel@dilger.ca>,
	linux-ext4@vger.kernel.org
References: <1435934443-17090-1-git-send-email-matthew.r.wilcox@intel.com>
 <1435934443-17090-4-git-send-email-matthew.r.wilcox@intel.com>
 <20150703183027.GH9456@thunk.org>
 <20150703184824.GA13681@linux.intel.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20150703184824.GA13681@linux.intel.com>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.23 (2014-03-12)
X-SA-Exim-Connect-IP: <locally generated>
X-SA-Exim-Mail-From: tytso@thunk.org
X-SA-Exim-Scanned: No (on imap.thunk.org); SAEximRunCond expanded to false
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
List-ID: <linux-kernel.vger.kernel.org>
X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Content-Length: 945
Lines: 22

On Fri, Jul 03, 2015 at 02:48:24PM -0400, Matthew Wilcox wrote:
> 
> At boot, I "modprobe pmem".

Is there a reason why it's important to build and load pmem as a
module?  If I use CONFIG_BLK_DEV_PMEM=y (which is more convenient
given how I launch my KVM test appliance), should I expect any
problems?

I assume that this won't detect any bugs caused by missing CLFLUSH
instructions, but I assume that when using NVM as a block device, this
isn't much of an issue, as long as we don't care about torn writes?
(How using NVM with metdata checksums, or any checksums for that
matter, seems to be an interesting question --- how do we recover from
a checksum failure after a power failure?)

					- Ted
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/