On Tue, Sep 26, 2017 at 11:16:38AM -0600, Ross Zwisler wrote:
> On Tue, Sep 26, 2017 at 08:36:50AM +0200, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> > On Mon, Sep 25, 2017 at 05:13:59PM -0600, Ross Zwisler wrote:
> > > Currently only the blocksize is checked, but we should really be calling
> > > bdev_dax_supporte
On Tue, Sep 26, 2017 at 08:36:50AM +0200, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> On Mon, Sep 25, 2017 at 05:13:59PM -0600, Ross Zwisler wrote:
> > Currently only the blocksize is checked, but we should really be calling
> > bdev_dax_supported() which also tests to make sure we can get a
> > struct dax_device a
On Mon, Sep 25, 2017 at 05:13:59PM -0600, Ross Zwisler wrote:
> Currently only the blocksize is checked, but we should really be calling
> bdev_dax_supported() which also tests to make sure we can get a
> struct dax_device and that the dax_direct_access() path is working.
>
> This is the same chec
Currently only the blocksize is checked, but we should really be calling
bdev_dax_supported() which also tests to make sure we can get a
struct dax_device and that the dax_direct_access() path is working.
This is the same check that we do for the "-o dax" mount option in
xfs_fs_fill_super().
Sign
4 matches
Mail list logo
