Messages in this thread | | | From | Linus Torvalds <> | Date | Mon, 11 Mar 2019 17:07:43 -0700 | Subject | Re: [GIT PULL] device-dax for 5.1: PMEM as RAM |
| |
On Mon, Mar 11, 2019 at 8:37 AM Dan Williams <dan.j.williams@intel.com> wrote: > > Another feature the userspace tooling can support for the PMEM as RAM > case is the ability to complete an Address Range Scrub of the range > before it is added to the core-mm. I.e at least ensure that previously > encountered poison is eliminated.
Ok, so this at least makes sense as an argument to me.
In the "PMEM as filesystem" part, the errors have long-term history, while in "PMEM as RAM" the memory may be physically the same thing, but it doesn't have the history and as such may not be prone to long-term errors the same way.
So that validly argues that yes, when used as RAM, the likelihood for errors is much lower because they don't accumulate the same way.
> The driver can also publish an > attribute to indicate when rep; mov is recoverable, and gate the > hotplug policy on the result. In my opinion a positive indicator of > the cpu's ability to recover rep; mov exceptions is a gap that needs > addressing.
Is there some way to say "don't raise MC for this region"? Or at least limit it to a nonfatal one?
Linus
| |