From: Keith Busch <kbusch@kernel.org>
To: Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de>
Cc: John Garry <john.g.garry@oracle.com>,
"Darrick J. Wong" <djwong@kernel.org>,
linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, linux-xfs@vger.kernel.org,
linux-block@vger.kernel.org, linux-nvme@lists.infradead.org
Subject: Re: Do we need an opt-in for file systems use of hw atomic writes?
Date: Tue, 15 Jul 2025 14:56:04 -0600 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <aHbAZBf12kiEdXfH@kbusch-mbp> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20250714131713.GA8742@lst.de>
On Mon, Jul 14, 2025 at 03:17:13PM +0200, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> Is is just me, or would it be a good idea to require an explicit
> opt-in to user hardware atomics?
IMO, if the block device's limits reports atomic capabilities, it's fair
game for any in kernel use. These are used outside of filesystems too,
like through raw block fops.
We've already settled on discarding problematic nvme attributes from
consideration. Is there something beyond that you've really found? If
so, maybe we should continue down the path of splitting more queue
limits into "hardware" and "user" values, and make filesystems subscribe
to the udev value where it defaults to "unsupported" for untrusted
devices.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2025-07-15 20:56 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 28+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2025-07-14 13:17 Do we need an opt-in for file systems use of hw atomic writes? Christoph Hellwig
2025-07-14 13:24 ` Theodore Ts'o
2025-07-14 13:30 ` Christoph Hellwig
2025-07-14 16:04 ` Darrick J. Wong
2025-07-15 6:00 ` Christoph Hellwig
2025-07-15 3:22 ` Martin K. Petersen
2025-07-15 6:00 ` Christoph Hellwig
2025-07-15 12:45 ` Martin K. Petersen
2025-07-14 13:39 ` John Garry
2025-07-14 13:50 ` Christoph Hellwig
2025-07-14 15:53 ` John Garry
2025-07-15 6:02 ` Christoph Hellwig
2025-07-15 8:42 ` John Garry
2025-07-15 9:03 ` Christoph Hellwig
2025-08-19 11:42 ` John Garry
2025-08-19 13:39 ` Christoph Hellwig
2025-08-19 14:36 ` John Garry
2025-08-19 14:43 ` Darrick J. Wong
2025-08-19 14:45 ` Christoph Hellwig
2025-08-21 14:01 ` Keith Busch
2025-07-15 10:02 ` Christian Brauner
2025-07-15 11:29 ` Christoph Hellwig
2025-07-15 12:20 ` Christian Brauner
2025-07-15 11:58 ` Theodore Ts'o
2025-07-14 20:53 ` Dave Chinner
2025-07-15 6:05 ` Christoph Hellwig
2025-07-15 20:56 ` Keith Busch [this message]
2025-07-16 5:50 ` Nilay Shroff
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=aHbAZBf12kiEdXfH@kbusch-mbp \
--to=kbusch@kernel.org \
--cc=djwong@kernel.org \
--cc=hch@lst.de \
--cc=john.g.garry@oracle.com \
--cc=linux-block@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-nvme@lists.infradead.org \
--cc=linux-xfs@vger.kernel.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).