On Thu, Apr 5, 2018 at 1:01 AM, Christoph Hellwig <[email protected]> wrote:
> On Thu, Apr 05, 2018 at 12:56:02AM -0700, Dan Williams wrote:
>> Yes, I think it is unfortunate that the failure mode is exposed to
>> software at all. The problem is that ADR is a platform feature that
>> depends on power supply requirements external to the NVDIMM device. An
>> SSD is different. It is a self contained system that can arrange for
>> the whole device to fail if the internal energy source fails and
>> otherwise hide this detail from software. My personal take, a system
>> designer that can specify and qualify an entire stack of components
>> can certainly opt-out of advertising the flush capability to the OS
>> because, like the SSD vendor, they control the integrated solution. A
>> platform vendor that allows off the shelf power supplies would in my
>> opinion be remiss not to give the OS the option to mitigate the
>> quality of some random power supply. It then follow that if the OS has
>> the ability to mitigate ADR failure it should be through a common
>> interface between fsdax and devdax.
>
> That means IFF ADR can fail like this we can't treat it as stable
> storage and we must not support MAP_SYNC or equivalent device dax
> behavior, period.

Makes sense, we won't pursue *sync() support on device-dax it doesn't fit.
_______________________________________________
Linux-nvdimm mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.01.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-nvdimm

Reply via email to