On 12/16/20 6:42 PM, Verma, Vishal L wrote:
> On Wed, 2020-12-16 at 11:39 +0000, Joao Martins wrote:
>> On 7/16/20 7:46 PM, Joao Martins wrote:
>>> Hey,
>>>
>>> This series builds on top of this one[0] and does the following improvements
>>> to the Soft-Reserved subdivision:
>>>
>>> 1) Support for {create,reconfigure}-device for selecting @align (hugepage
>>> size).
>>> Here we add a '-a|--align 4K|2M|1G' option to the existing commands;
>>>
>>> 2) Listing improvements for device alignment and mappings;
>>> Note: Perhaps it is better to hide the mappings by default, and only
>>> print with -v|--verbose. This would align with ndctl, as the mappings
>>> info can be quite large.
>>>
>>> 3) Allow creating devices from selecting ranges. This allows to keep the
>>> same GPA->HPA mapping as before we kexec the hypervisor with running
>>> guests:
>>>
>>> daxctl list -d dax0.1 > /var/log/dax0.1.json
>>> kexec -d -l bzImage
>>> systemctl kexec
>>> daxctl create -u --restore /var/log/dax0.1.json
>>>
>>> The JSON was what I though it would be easier for an user, given that it
>>> is
>>> the data format daxctl outputs. Alternatives could be adding multiple:
>>> --mapping <pgoff>:<start>-<end>
>>>
>>> But that could end up in a gigantic line and a little more
>>> unmanageable I think.
>>>
>>> This series requires this series[0] on top of Dan's patches[1]:
>>>
>>> [0]
>>> https://lore.kernel.org/linux-nvdimm/[email protected]/
>>> [1]
>>> https://lore.kernel.org/linux-nvdimm/159457116473.754248.7879464730875147365.st...@dwillia2-desk3.amr.corp.intel.com/
>>>
>>> The only TODO here is docs and improving tests to validate mappings, and
>>> test
>>> the restore path.
>>>
>>> Suggestions/comments are welcome.
>>>
>> There's a couple of issues in this series regarding daxctl-reconfigure
>> options and
>> breakage of ndctl with kernels (<5.10) that do not supply a device @align
>> upon testing
>> with NVDIMMs. Plus it is missing daxctl-create.sh unit test for @align.
>>
>> I will fix those and respin, and probably take out the last patch as it's
>> more RFC-ish and
>> in need of feedback.
>
> Sounds good. Any objections to releasing v70 with the initial support,
> and then adding this series on for the next one? I'm thinking I'll do a
> much quicker v72 release say in early January with this and anything
> else that missed v71.
If we're able to wait until tomorrow, I could respin these first four patches
with the
fixes and include the align support in the initial set. Otherwise, I am also
good if you
prefer defering it to v72.
Joao
_______________________________________________
Linux-nvdimm mailing list -- [email protected]
To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]
