On Fri, 2017-04-28 at 12:39 -0700, Dan Williams wrote:
The pmem driver has a need to transfer data with a persistent
memory
destination and be able to rely on the fact that the destination
writes are not cached. It is sufficient for the writes to be flushed
to a cpu-store-buffer (non-temporal / "movnt" in x86 terms), as we
expect userspace to call fsync() to ensure data-writes have reached a
power-fail-safe zone in the platform. The fsync() triggers a REQ_FUA
or REQ_FLUSH to the pmem driver which will turn around and fence
previous writes with an "sfence".
Implement a __copy_from_user_inatomic_wt, memcpy_page_wt, and
memcpy_wt, that guarantee that the destination buffer is not dirty in
the cpu cache on completion. The new copy_from_iter_wt and sub-
routines will be used to replace the "pmem api" (include/linux/pmem.h
+ arch/x86/include/asm/pmem.h). The availability of
copy_from_iter_wt() and memcpy_wt() are gated by the
CONFIG_ARCH_HAS_UACCESS_WT config symbol, and fallback to
copy_from_iter_nocache() and plain memcpy() otherwise.
This is meant to satisfy the concern from Linus that if a driver
wants to do something beyond the normal nocache semantics it should
be something private to that driver [1], and Al's concern that
anything uaccess related belongs with the rest of the uaccess code
[2].
[1]:
https://lists.01.org/pipermail/linux-nvdimm/2017-January/008364.
html
[2]:
https://lists.01.org/pipermail/linux-nvdimm/2017-April/009942.ht
ml
Cc: <x86(a)kernel.org>
Cc: Jan Kara <jack(a)suse.cz>
Cc: Jeff Moyer <jmoyer(a)redhat.com>
Cc: Ingo Molnar <mingo(a)redhat.com>
Cc: Christoph Hellwig <hch(a)lst.de>
Cc: "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa(a)zytor.com>
Cc: Al Viro <viro(a)zeniv.linux.org.uk>
Cc: Thomas Gleixner <tglx(a)linutronix.de>
Cc: Matthew Wilcox <mawilcox(a)microsoft.com>
Cc: Ross Zwisler <ross.zwisler(a)linux.intel.com>
Signed-off-by: Dan Williams <dan.j.williams(a)intel.com>
---
Changes since the initial RFC:
* s/writethru/wt/ since we already have ioremap_wt(),
set_memory_wt(), etc. (Ingo)
Sorry I should have said earlier, but I think the term "wt" is
misleading. Non-temporal stores used in memcpy_wt() provide WC
semantics, not WT semantics. How about using "nocache" as it's been
used in __copy_user_nocache()?
Thanks,
-Toshi