From: Ross Zwisler Subject: Re: [PATCH v5 3/5] dax: use sb_issue_zerout instead of calling dax_clear_sectors Date: Mon, 9 May 2016 08:55:27 -0600 Message-ID: <20160509145527.GA31079@linux.intel.com> References: <1462571591-3361-1-git-send-email-vishal.l.verma@intel.com> <1462571591-3361-4-git-send-email-vishal.l.verma@intel.com> <20160508085203.GA10160@infradead.org> <1462733173.3006.7.camel@intel.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Cc: "linux-block@vger.kernel.org" , "jack@suse.cz" , "boaz@plexistor.com" , "axboe@fb.com" , "linux-nvdimm@ml01.01.org" , "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" , "xfs@oss.sgi.com" , "hch@infradead.org" , "linux-mm@kvack.org" , "jmoyer@redhat.com" , "Wilcox, Matthew R" , "ross.zwisler@linux.intel.com" , "linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org" , "Williams, Dan J" , "linux-ext4@vger.kernel.org" , "akpm@linux-foundation.org" To: "Verma, Vishal L" Return-path: Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <1462733173.3006.7.camel@intel.com> List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: xfs-bounces@oss.sgi.com Sender: xfs-bounces@oss.sgi.com List-Id: linux-ext4.vger.kernel.org On Sun, May 08, 2016 at 06:46:13PM +0000, Verma, Vishal L wrote: > On Sun, 2016-05-08 at 01:52 -0700, Christoph Hellwig wrote: > > On Fri, May 06, 2016 at 03:53:09PM -0600, Vishal Verma wrote: > > > = > > > From: Matthew Wilcox > > > = > > > dax_clear_sectors() cannot handle poisoned blocks.=A0=A0These must be > > > zeroed using the BIO interface instead.=A0=A0Convert ext2 and XFS to > > > use > > > only sb_issue_zerout(). > > > = > > > Signed-off-by: Matthew Wilcox > > > [vishal: Also remove the dax_clear_sectors function entirely] > > > Signed-off-by: Vishal Verma > > Just to make sure:=A0=A0the existing sb_issue_zerout as in 4.6-rc > > is already doing the right thing for DAX?=A0=A0I've got a pending > > patchset > > for XFS that introduces another dax_clear_sectors users, but if it's > > already safe to use blkdev_issue_zeroout I can switch to that and > > avoid > > the merge conflict. > = > I believe so - Jan has moved all unwritten extent conversions out of > DAX with his patch set, and I believe zeroing through the driver is > always fine. Ross or Jan could confirm though.=A0 Yep, I believe that the existing sb_issue_zeroout() as of v4.6-rc* does the right thing. We'll end up calling sb_issue_zeroout() =3D> blkdev_issue_zer= oout() =3D> __blkdev_issue_zeroout() because we don't have support for discard or write_same in PMEM. This will send zero page BIOs to the PMEM driver, which will do the zeroing as normal writes. _______________________________________________ xfs mailing list xfs@oss.sgi.com http://oss.sgi.com/mailman/listinfo/xfs