On Wed, May 2, 2018 at 6:57 AM, Dan Williams wrote:
> On Thu, Apr 5, 2018 at 8:00 AM, Dan Williams wrote:
>> On Wed, Apr 4, 2018 at 11:45 PM, Nicholas Piggin wrote:
> [,,]
>>> What's the problem with just counting bytes copied like usercopy --
>>> why is that harder than cacheline accuracy?
>>>
On Thu, Apr 5, 2018 at 8:00 AM, Dan Williams wrote:
> On Wed, Apr 4, 2018 at 11:45 PM, Nicholas Piggin wrote:
[,,]
>> What's the problem with just counting bytes copied like usercopy --
>> why is that harder than cacheline accuracy?
>>
>>> I'd rather implement the existing interface and port/supp
> I thought the cache-aligned might make sense, since usually we'd expect the
> failure to be at a cache-line level, but our copy_tofrom_user does accurate
> accounting
That's one of the wrinkles in the current x86 memcpy_mcsafe(). It starts by
checking alignment of the source address, and moves a
On Fri, Apr 6, 2018 at 11:26 AM, Nicholas Piggin wrote:
> On Thu, 05 Apr 2018 16:40:26 -0400
> Jeff Moyer wrote:
>
>> Nicholas Piggin writes:
>>
>> > On Thu, 5 Apr 2018 15:53:07 +1000
>> > Balbir Singh wrote:
>> >> I'm thinking about it, I wonder what "bytes remaining" mean in pmem
>> >> conte
On Thu, 05 Apr 2018 16:40:26 -0400
Jeff Moyer wrote:
> Nicholas Piggin writes:
>
> > On Thu, 5 Apr 2018 15:53:07 +1000
> > Balbir Singh wrote:
> >> I'm thinking about it, I wonder what "bytes remaining" mean in pmem context
> >> in the context of a machine check exception. Also, do we want t
Nicholas Piggin writes:
> On Thu, 5 Apr 2018 15:53:07 +1000
> Balbir Singh wrote:
>> I'm thinking about it, I wonder what "bytes remaining" mean in pmem context
>> in the context of a machine check exception. Also, do we want to be byte
>> accurate or cache-line accurate for the bytes remaining?
On Wed, Apr 4, 2018 at 11:45 PM, Nicholas Piggin wrote:
> On Thu, 5 Apr 2018 15:53:07 +1000
> Balbir Singh wrote:
>
>> On Thu, 5 Apr 2018 15:04:05 +1000
>> Nicholas Piggin wrote:
>>
>> > On Wed, 4 Apr 2018 20:00:52 -0700
>> > Dan Williams wrote:
>> >
>> > > [ adding Matthew, Christoph, and Tony
On Thu, 5 Apr 2018 15:53:07 +1000
Balbir Singh wrote:
> On Thu, 5 Apr 2018 15:04:05 +1000
> Nicholas Piggin wrote:
>
> > On Wed, 4 Apr 2018 20:00:52 -0700
> > Dan Williams wrote:
> >
> > > [ adding Matthew, Christoph, and Tony ]
> > >
> > > On Wed, Apr 4, 2018 at 4:57 PM, Nicholas Piggin
On Thu, 5 Apr 2018 15:04:05 +1000
Nicholas Piggin wrote:
> On Wed, 4 Apr 2018 20:00:52 -0700
> Dan Williams wrote:
>
> > [ adding Matthew, Christoph, and Tony ]
> >
> > On Wed, Apr 4, 2018 at 4:57 PM, Nicholas Piggin wrote:
> > > On Thu, 5 Apr 2018 09:19:42 +1000
> > > Balbir Singh wrote
On Wed, 4 Apr 2018 20:00:52 -0700
Dan Williams wrote:
> [ adding Matthew, Christoph, and Tony ]
>
> On Wed, Apr 4, 2018 at 4:57 PM, Nicholas Piggin wrote:
> > On Thu, 5 Apr 2018 09:19:42 +1000
> > Balbir Singh wrote:
> >
> >> The pmem infrastructure uses memcpy_mcsafe in the pmem
> >> laye
[ adding Matthew, Christoph, and Tony ]
On Wed, Apr 4, 2018 at 4:57 PM, Nicholas Piggin wrote:
> On Thu, 5 Apr 2018 09:19:42 +1000
> Balbir Singh wrote:
>
>> The pmem infrastructure uses memcpy_mcsafe in the pmem
>> layer so as to convert machine check excpetions into
>> a return value on fail
On Thu, 5 Apr 2018 09:19:42 +1000
Balbir Singh 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 f
12 matches
Mail list logo