On Wed, 4 Apr 2018 20:00:52 -0700
Dan Williams <dan.j.willi...@intel.com> wrote:

> [ adding Matthew, Christoph, and Tony  ]
> 
> On Wed, Apr 4, 2018 at 4:57 PM, Nicholas Piggin <npig...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > On Thu,  5 Apr 2018 09:19:42 +1000
> > Balbir Singh <bsinghar...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >  
> >> The pmem infrastructure uses memcpy_mcsafe in the pmem
> >> layer so as to convert machine check excpetions into
> >> a return value on failure in case a machine check
> >> exception is encoutered during the memcpy.
> >>
> >> This patch largely borrows from the copyuser_power7
> >> logic and does not add the VMX optimizations, largely
> >> to keep the patch simple. If needed those optimizations
> >> can be folded in.  
> >
> > So memcpy_mcsafe doesn't return number of bytes copied?
> > Huh, well that makes it simple.  
> 
> Well, not in current kernels, but we need to add that support or
> remove the direct call to copy_to_iter() in fs/dax.c. I'm looking
> right now to add "bytes remaining" support to the x86 memcpy_mcsafe(),
> but for copy_to_user we also need to handle bytes remaining for write
> faults. That fix is hopefully something that can land in an early
> 4.17-rc, but it won't be ready for -rc1.

I wonder if the powerpc implementation should just go straight to
counting bytes. Backporting to this interface would be trivial, but
it would just mean there's only one variant of the code to support.
That's up to Balbir though.

Thanks,
Nick
_______________________________________________
Linux-nvdimm mailing list
Linux-nvdimm@lists.01.org
https://lists.01.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-nvdimm

Reply via email to