From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D65C4C43219 for ; Mon, 18 Oct 2021 15:06:29 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C2C896103D for ; Mon, 18 Oct 2021 15:06:29 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S232659AbhJRPIj (ORCPT ); Mon, 18 Oct 2021 11:08:39 -0400 Received: from verein.lst.de ([213.95.11.211]:34649 "EHLO verein.lst.de" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S233075AbhJRPIF (ORCPT ); Mon, 18 Oct 2021 11:08:05 -0400 Received: by verein.lst.de (Postfix, from userid 2407) id B48D068AFE; Mon, 18 Oct 2021 17:05:50 +0200 (CEST) Date: Mon, 18 Oct 2021 17:05:50 +0200 From: Christoph Hellwig To: Lennart Poettering Cc: Christoph Hellwig , Jens Axboe , Ming Lei , Martijn Coenen , linux-block@vger.kernel.org, Luca Boccassi , Karel Zak Subject: Re: Is LO_FLAGS_DIRECT_IO by default a good idea? Message-ID: <20211018150550.GA29993@lst.de> References: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.17 (2007-11-01) Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-block@vger.kernel.org On Mon, Oct 18, 2021 at 04:19:20PM +0200, Lennart Poettering wrote: > A brief answer like "yes, please, enable by default" would already > make me happy. I thikn enabling it by default is a good idea. The only good use case I can think of for using buffered I/O is when the image has a smaller block size than supported on the host file.