Re: [PATCH 4/6] fs: introduce RWF_DIRECT to allow using O_DIRECT on a per-IO basis

Mike Snitzer
2025-06-11T10:51:31Z

On Tue, Jun 10, 2025 at 11:58:25PM -0700, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 10, 2025 at 04:57:35PM -0400, Mike Snitzer wrote:
> > Avoids the need to open code do_iter_readv_writev() purely to request
> > that a sync iocb make use of IOCB_DIRECT.
> >
> > Care was taken to preserve the long-established value for IOCB_DIRECT
> > (1 << 17) when introducing RWF_DIRECT.
>
> What is the problem with using vfs_iocb_iter_read instead of
> vfs_iter_read and passing the iocb directly?

Open to whatever. I just didn't want to open code
do_iter_readv_writev() like my header said at the start.

Mike