Re: use memcpy_mcsafe() for copy_to_iter() (was: Re: [PATCH v3 0/9] Series short description)

On Mon, May 14, 2018 at 11:49 PM, Ingo Molnar wrote: > > * Dan Williams wrote: > >> On Mon, May 14, 2018 at 12:26 AM, Ingo Molnar wrote: >> > >> > * Dan Williams wrote: >> > >> >> Ingo, Thomas, Al, any

Re: use memcpy_mcsafe() for copy_to_iter() (was: Re: [PATCH v3 0/9] Series short description)

On Mon, May 14, 2018 at 11:49 PM, Ingo Molnar wrote: > > * Dan Williams wrote: > >> On Mon, May 14, 2018 at 12:26 AM, Ingo Molnar wrote: >> > >> > * Dan Williams wrote: >> > >> >> Ingo, Thomas, Al, any concerns with this series? >> > >> > Yeah, so: >> > >> >"[PATCH v3 0/9] Series short

Re: use memcpy_mcsafe() for copy_to_iter() (was: Re: [PATCH v3 0/9] Series short description)

* Dan Williams wrote: > On Mon, May 14, 2018 at 12:26 AM, Ingo Molnar wrote: > > > > * Dan Williams wrote: > > > >> Ingo, Thomas, Al, any concerns with this series? > > > > Yeah, so: > > > >"[PATCH v3 0/9] Series short

Re: use memcpy_mcsafe() for copy_to_iter() (was: Re: [PATCH v3 0/9] Series short description)

* Dan Williams wrote: > On Mon, May 14, 2018 at 12:26 AM, Ingo Molnar wrote: > > > > * Dan Williams wrote: > > > >> Ingo, Thomas, Al, any concerns with this series? > > > > Yeah, so: > > > >"[PATCH v3 0/9] Series short description" > > > > ... isn't the catchiest of titles to capture my

Re: use memcpy_mcsafe() for copy_to_iter() (was: Re: [PATCH v3 0/9] Series short description)

On Mon, May 14, 2018 at 8:52 AM Dan Williams wrote: > I think "happy" is a strong word when it comes to x86 machine check > handling. My interpretation is that he and Andy acquiesced that this > is about the best we can do with dax+mce as things stand today. Yeah. I

Re: use memcpy_mcsafe() for copy_to_iter() (was: Re: [PATCH v3 0/9] Series short description)

On Mon, May 14, 2018 at 8:52 AM Dan Williams wrote: > I think "happy" is a strong word when it comes to x86 machine check > handling. My interpretation is that he and Andy acquiesced that this > is about the best we can do with dax+mce as things stand today. Yeah. I definitely wouldn't say

Re: use memcpy_mcsafe() for copy_to_iter() (was: Re: [PATCH v3 0/9] Series short description)

> On May 14, 2018, at 8:52 AM, Dan Williams wrote: > > > I think "happy" is a strong word when it comes to x86 machine check > handling. My interpretation is that he and Andy acquiesced that this > is about the best we can do with dax+mce as things stand today.

Re: use memcpy_mcsafe() for copy_to_iter() (was: Re: [PATCH v3 0/9] Series short description)

> On May 14, 2018, at 8:52 AM, Dan Williams wrote: > > > I think "happy" is a strong word when it comes to x86 machine check > handling. My interpretation is that he and Andy acquiesced that this > is about the best we can do with dax+mce as things stand today. Agreed. I think it’s

Re: use memcpy_mcsafe() for copy_to_iter() (was: Re: [PATCH v3 0/9] Series short description)

On Mon, May 14, 2018 at 12:26 AM, Ingo Molnar wrote: > > * Dan Williams wrote: > >> Ingo, Thomas, Al, any concerns with this series? > > Yeah, so: > >"[PATCH v3 0/9] Series short description" > > ... isn't the catchiest of titles to capture my [all

Re: use memcpy_mcsafe() for copy_to_iter() (was: Re: [PATCH v3 0/9] Series short description)

On Mon, May 14, 2018 at 12:26 AM, Ingo Molnar wrote: > > * Dan Williams wrote: > >> Ingo, Thomas, Al, any concerns with this series? > > Yeah, so: > >"[PATCH v3 0/9] Series short description" > > ... isn't the catchiest of titles to capture my [all too easily distracted] > attention! ;-) My

Re: use memcpy_mcsafe() for copy_to_iter() (was: Re: [PATCH v3 0/9] Series short description)

* Dan Williams wrote: > Ingo, Thomas, Al, any concerns with this series? Yeah, so: "[PATCH v3 0/9] Series short description" ... isn't the catchiest of titles to capture my [all too easily distracted] attention! ;-) I have marked it now for -tip processing.

Re: use memcpy_mcsafe() for copy_to_iter() (was: Re: [PATCH v3 0/9] Series short description)

* Dan Williams wrote: > Ingo, Thomas, Al, any concerns with this series? Yeah, so: "[PATCH v3 0/9] Series short description" ... isn't the catchiest of titles to capture my [all too easily distracted] attention! ;-) I have marked it now for -tip processing. Linus was happy with this and

use memcpy_mcsafe() for copy_to_iter() (was: Re: [PATCH v3 0/9] Series short description)

Ingo, Thomas, Al, any concerns with this series? On Thu, May 3, 2018 at 5:06 PM, Dan Williams wrote: > Changes since v2 [1]: > > * Fix source address increment in mcsafe_handle_tail() (Mika) > > * Extend the unit test to inject simulated write faults and validate >

use memcpy_mcsafe() for copy_to_iter() (was: Re: [PATCH v3 0/9] Series short description)

Ingo, Thomas, Al, any concerns with this series? On Thu, May 3, 2018 at 5:06 PM, Dan Williams wrote: > Changes since v2 [1]: > > * Fix source address increment in mcsafe_handle_tail() (Mika) > > * Extend the unit test to inject simulated write faults and validate > that data is properly