Re: [GIT PULL] bcachefs changes for 6.17

Keith Busch
2025-08-12T20:30:46Z

On Tue, Aug 12, 2025 at 04:03:17PM -0400, Kent Overstreet wrote:
> On Tue, Aug 12, 2025 at 01:35:56PM -0600, Keith Busch wrote:
> > On Mon, Aug 11, 2025 at 10:26:03AM -0400, Kent Overstreet wrote:
> > > On the other hand, for the only incidences I can remotely refer to in
> > > the past year and a half, there has been:
> > ...
> >
> > > - the block layer developer who went on a four email rant where he,
> > > charitably, misread the spec or the patchset or both; all this over a
> > > patch to simply bring a warning in line with the actual NVME and SCSI
> > > specs.
> >
> > Are you talking about this thread?
> >
> > https://lore.kernel.org/linux-block/20250311201518.3573009-14-kent.overstreet@linux.dev/
> >
> > I try to closely follow those lists, and that's the only thread I recall
> > that even slightly rings a bell from your description, however it's not
> > an accurate description (you were the one who misread the specs there; I
> > tried to help bridge the gap). I recall the interaction was pretty tame
> > though, so maybe you're talking about something else. Perhaps a link for
> > context if I got it wrong?
>
> I've since seen a lot of actual test data from SCSI hard drives - fua
> reads are definitely not cached, without exception across manufacturers.
>
> On NVME the situation is much murkier.

Okay, I take it I got the right thread then. I just wanted to get the
context. For the record, all the specs align with what read fua does
(anyone interested can visit the linked thread, I don't want to hijack
this one for it).