From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from lindbergh.monkeyblade.net (lindbergh.monkeyblade.net [23.128.96.19]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id B8F1F200C8; Thu, 9 Nov 2023 15:15:39 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=none Received: from verein.lst.de (verein.lst.de [213.95.11.211]) by lindbergh.monkeyblade.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 0BB851735; Thu, 9 Nov 2023 07:15:39 -0800 (PST) Received: by verein.lst.de (Postfix, from userid 2407) id 6FC6967373; Thu, 9 Nov 2023 16:15:32 +0100 (CET) Date: Thu, 9 Nov 2023 16:15:31 +0100 From: Christoph Hellwig To: "Martin K. Petersen" Cc: Bart Van Assche , John Garry , Eric Biggers , axboe@kernel.dk, kbusch@kernel.org, hch@lst.de, sagi@grimberg.me, jejb@linux.ibm.com, djwong@kernel.org, viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk, brauner@kernel.org, chandan.babu@oracle.com, dchinner@redhat.com, linux-block@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-nvme@lists.infradead.org, linux-xfs@vger.kernel.org, linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, tytso@mit.edu, jbongio@google.com, linux-api@vger.kernel.org, Prasad Singamsetty Subject: Re: [PATCH 03/21] fs/bdev: Add atomic write support info to statx Message-ID: <20231109151531.GC32432@lst.de> References: <20230929102726.2985188-1-john.g.garry@oracle.com> <20230929102726.2985188-4-john.g.garry@oracle.com> <20230929224922.GB11839@google.com> <2c929105-7c7f-43c5-a105-42d1813d0e29@acm.org> Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-api@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: 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) On Mon, Oct 02, 2023 at 08:28:04PM -0400, Martin K. Petersen wrote: > > Bart, > > > Neither the SCSI SBC standard nor the NVMe standard defines a "minimum > > atomic write unit". So why to introduce something in the Linux kernel > > that is not defined in common storage standards? > > >From SBC-5: > > "The ATOMIC TRANSFER LENGTH GRANULARITY field indicates the minimum > transfer length for an atomic write command." I would suggest that we don't try to claim any atomic write capability if this is not a logical block as such devices are completely useless. In fact I'd add a big warning to the kernel log if a device claims this, as this breaks all the implicit assumptions that a single logical block write is atomic.