Received-SPF: pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) client-ip=209.132.180.67;
Subject: Re: [PATCH] filesystem-dax: Disable PMD support
To:     Dan Williams <dan.j.williams@intel.com>
Cc:     Matthew Wilcox <willy@infradead.org>,
        Seema Pandit <seema.pandit@intel.com>,
        linux-nvdimm <linux-nvdimm@lists.01.org>,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
        stable <stable@vger.kernel.org>,
        Robert Barror <robert.barror@intel.com>,
        linux-fsdevel <linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org>,
        Jan Kara <jack@suse.cz>
References: <CAPcyv4jjqooboxivY=AsfEPhCvxdwU66GpwE9vM+cqrZWvtX3g@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAPcyv4h6HgNE38RF5TxO3C268ZvrxgcPNrPWOt94MnO5gP_pjw@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAPcyv4gwd1_VHk_MfHeNSxyH+N1=aatj9WkKXqYNPkSXe4bFDg@mail.gmail.com>
 <20190627195948.GB4286@bombadil.infradead.org>
 <CAPcyv4iB3f1hDdCsw=Cy234dP-RXpxGyXDoTwEU8nt5qUDEVQg@mail.gmail.com>
 <20190629160336.GB1180@bombadil.infradead.org>
 <CAPcyv4ge3Ht1k_v=tSoVA6hCzKg1N3imhs_rTL3oTB+5_KC8_Q@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAA9_cmcb-Prn6CnOx-mJfb9CRdf0uG9u4M1Vq1B1rKVemCD-Vw@mail.gmail.com>
 <20190630152324.GA15900@bombadil.infradead.org>
 <CAPcyv4j2NBPBEUU3UW1Q5OyOEuo9R5e90HpkowpeEkMsAKiUyQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <20190702033410.GB1729@bombadil.infradead.org>
 <CAPcyv4iEkN1o5HD6Gb9m5ohdAVQhmtiTDcFE+PMQczYx635Vwg@mail.gmail.com>
 <fa9b9165-7910-1fbd-fb5b-78023936d2f2@gmail.com>
 <CAPcyv4ihQ9djQvgnqZoTLRH3CwFhpWK_uUrmWSLH_3-Fi1g1qw@mail.gmail.com>
From:   Boaz Harrosh <openosd@gmail.com>
Message-ID: <1eac7cfb-a23c-097e-8dba-d83e6921f152@gmail.com>
Date:   Wed, 3 Jul 2019 04:39:38 +0300
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:60.0) Gecko/20100101
 Thunderbird/60.7.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <CAPcyv4ihQ9djQvgnqZoTLRH3CwFhpWK_uUrmWSLH_3-Fi1g1qw@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Language: en-MW
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Precedence: bulk

On 03/07/2019 03:42, Dan Williams wrote:
> On Tue, Jul 2, 2019 at 5:23 PM Boaz Harrosh <openosd@gmail.com> wrote:
<>
> 
> Yes, but the trick is how to manage cases where someone waiting on one
> type needs to be woken up by an event on the other. 

Exactly I'm totally with you on this.

> So all I'm saying it lets live with more hash collisions until we can figure out a race
> free way to better scale waitqueue usage.
> 

Yes and lets actually do real measurements to see if this really hurts needlessly.
Maybe not so much

Thanks
Boaz

<>