[lkml]   [2015]   [May]   [29]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
SubjectRe: [PATCH v10 12/12] drivers/block/pmem: Map NVDIMM with ioremap_wt()
Nontemporal stores to WB memory is fine in such a way that it doesn't pollute the cache.  This can be done by denoting to WC or by forcing cache allocation out of only a subset of the cache.

On May 29, 2015 2:46:19 PM PDT, Andy Lutomirski <> wrote:
>On Fri, May 29, 2015 at 2:29 PM, Elliott, Robert (Server Storage)
><> wrote:
>>> -----Original Message-----
>>> From: Andy Lutomirski []
>>> Sent: Friday, May 29, 2015 1:35 PM
>> ...
>>> Whoa, there! Why would we use non-temporal stores to WB memory to
>>> access persistent memory? I can see two reasons not to:
>> Data written to a block storage device (here, the NVDIMM) is unlikely
>> to be read or written again any time soon. It's not like the code
>> and data that a program has in memory, where there might be a loop
>> accessing the location every CPU clock; it's storage I/O to
>> historically very slow (relative to the CPU clock speed) devices.
>> The source buffer for that data might be frequently accessed,
>> but not the NVDIMM storage itself.
>> Non-temporal stores avoid wasting cache space on these "one-time"
>> accesses. The same applies for reads and non-temporal loads.
>> Keep the CPU data cache lines free for the application.
>> DAX and mmap() do change that; the application is now free to
>> store frequently accessed data structures directly in persistent
>> memory. But, that's not available if btt is used, and
>> application loads and stores won't go through the memcpy()
>> calls inside pmem anyway. The non-temporal instructions are
>> cache coherent, so data integrity won't get confused by them
>> if I/O going through pmem's block storage APIs happens
>> to overlap with the application's mmap() regions.
>You answered the wrong question. :) I understand the point of the
>non-temporal stores -- I don't understand the point of using
>non-temporal stores to *WB memory*. I think we should be okay with
>having the kernel mapping use WT instead.

Sent from my mobile phone. Please pardon brevity and lack of formatting.

 \ /
  Last update: 2015-05-30 01:21    [W:0.096 / U:7.000 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site