On Tue, Nov 21, 2017 at 3:05 PM, Andrew Morton
wrote:
>
> On Tue, 14 Nov 2017 11:56:34 -0800 Dan Williams
> wrote:
>
> > Until there is a solution to the dma-to-dax vs truncate problem it is
> > not safe to allow long standing memory registrations against
> > filesytem-dax vmas. Device-dax vmas
On Tue, 14 Nov 2017 11:56:34 -0800 Dan Williams
wrote:
> Until there is a solution to the dma-to-dax vs truncate problem it is
> not safe to allow long standing memory registrations against
> filesytem-dax vmas. Device-dax vmas do not have this problem and are
> explicitly allowed.
>
> This is
On Tue, 14 Nov 2017 11:56:34 -0800 Dan Williams
wrote:
> Until there is a solution to the dma-to-dax vs truncate problem it is
> not safe to allow long standing memory registrations against
> filesytem-dax vmas. Device-dax vmas do not have this problem and are
> explicitly allowed.
>
> This is
Until there is a solution to the dma-to-dax vs truncate problem it is
not safe to allow long standing memory registrations against
filesytem-dax vmas. Device-dax vmas do not have this problem and are
explicitly allowed.
This is temporary until a "memory registration with layout-lease"
mechanism ca
4 matches
Mail list logo