On Fri, 2015-12-18 at 14:23 -0800, Dan Williams wrote:
> On Fri, Dec 18, 2015 at 10:52 AM, Toshi Kani <toshi.kani(a)hpe.com> wrote:
> > On Fri, 2015-12-18 at 09:54 -0800, Dan Williams wrote:
> > > On Fri, Dec 18, 2015 at 7:15 AM, Toshi Kani <toshi.kani(a)hpe.com>
> > > wrote:
> > > > On Fri, 2015-12-18 at 01:34 -0700, Vishal Verma wrote:
> > > > > Also, I wonder if this problem is solved by using libndctl to
> > > > > manage
> > > > > BTTs.
> > > >
> > > > I have not tested with libndctl yet, but I think our bind/unbind
> > > > scripts do the same procedures.
> > >
> > > We loop through all combinations of sector size in our unit test. If
> > > you want to change the sector size the expectation is that the
> > > namespace is destroyed and fully re-created, especially due to the
> > > fact that changing sector size invalidates all data on the namespace.
> > >
> > > See: https://github.com/pmem/ndctl/blob/master/lib/test-libndctl.c
> > The parent_uuid is not set on our NVDIMM-N systems. I do not see
> > 'uuid' file under sysfs 'namespaceX.X' per namespace_visible(),
> > This concept of creating/destroying a namespace is a bit foreign to us
> > since we've never needed to do. Can you elaborate how it's supposed to
> > work for NVDIMM-N?
> Ugh, yes. An oversight on my part, let me give this some thought.
> Whatever we decide, I want the libndctl api to be identical for the
> two cases.
> I expect the simplest option is to have
> ndctl_namespace_disable_invalidate() destroy the btt-info block in the
> NVDIMM-N case.
Do you have any update on this? If we are going to use ndctl to address
this issue, does it mean that we will have to use ndctl to manage BTT?