On Thu, Apr 05, 2018 at 03:17:17PM -0700, Dan Williams wrote: > > 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.
We still have other bits of this way of thinking in the tree as far as I can tell, e.g. the nvdimm_flush calls in pmem_make_request and thus should come up with a coherent strategy if we trust ADR, and if we don't fully trust it how to mitigate it. _______________________________________________ Linux-nvdimm mailing list Linuxemail@example.com https://lists.01.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-nvdimm