linux-security-module.vger.kernel.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: "Darrick J. Wong" <djwong@kernel.org>
To: John Garry <john.g.garry@oracle.com>
Cc: Dave Chinner <david@fromorbit.com>,
	axboe@kernel.dk, kbusch@kernel.org, hch@lst.de, sagi@grimberg.me,
	martin.petersen@oracle.com, viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk,
	brauner@kernel.org, dchinner@redhat.com, jejb@linux.ibm.com,
	linux-block@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
	linux-nvme@lists.infradead.org, linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org,
	linux-xfs@vger.kernel.org, linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org,
	linux-security-module@vger.kernel.org, paul@paul-moore.com,
	jmorris@namei.org, serge@hallyn.com,
	Prasad Singamsetty <prasad.singamsetty@oracle.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH RFC 02/16] fs/bdev: Add atomic write support info to statx
Date: Fri, 5 May 2023 15:04:39 -0700	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20230505220439.GK15394@frogsfrogsfrogs> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <644fe4aa-cb89-0c14-4c90-cc93bcc6bbc2@oracle.com>

On Fri, May 05, 2023 at 09:01:58AM +0100, John Garry wrote:
> On 04/05/2023 23:40, Dave Chinner wrote:
> 
> Hi Dave,
> 
> > > No, not yet. Is it normally expected to provide a proposed man page update
> > > in parallel? Or somewhat later, when the kernel API change has some
> > > appreciable level of agreement?
> > Normally we ask for man page updates to be presented at the same
> > time, as the man page defines the user interface that is being
> > implemented. In this case, we need updates for the pwritev2() man
> > page to document RWF_ATOMIC semantics, and the statx() man page to
> > document what the variables being exposed mean w.r.t. RWF_ATOMIC.
> > 
> > The pwritev2() man page is probably the most important one right now
> > - it needs to explain the guarantees that RWF_ATOMIC is supposed to
> > provide w.r.t. data integrity, IO ordering, persistence, etc.
> > Indeed, it will need to explain exactly how this "multi-atomic-unit
> > mulit-bio non-atomic RWF_ATOMIC" IO thing can be used safely and
> > reliably, especially w.r.t. IO ordering and persistence guarantees
> > in the face of crashes and power failures. Not to mention
> > documenting error conditions specific to RWF_ATOMIC...
> > 
> > It's all well and good to have some implementation, but without
> > actually defining and documenting the*guarantees*  that RWF_ATOMIC
> > provides userspace it is completely useless for application
> > developers. And from the perspective of a reviewer, without the
> > documentation stating what the infrastructure actually guarantees
> > applications, we can't determine if the implementation being
> > presented is fit for purpose....
> 
> ok, understood. Obviously from any discussion so far there are many details
> which the user needs to know about how to use this interface and what to
> expect.
> 
> We'll look to start working on those man page details now.

Agreed.  The manpage contents are what needs to get worked on at LSFMM
where you'll have various block/fs/storage device people in the same
room with which to discuss various issues and try to smooth out the
misundertandings.

(Also: I've decided to cancel my in-person attendance due to a sudden
health issue.   I'll still be in the room, just virtually now. :()

--D

> Thanks,
> John

  reply	other threads:[~2023-05-05 22:05 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 50+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2023-05-03 18:38 [PATCH RFC 00/16] block atomic writes John Garry
2023-05-03 18:38 ` [PATCH RFC 01/16] block: Add atomic write operations to request_queue limits John Garry
2023-05-03 21:39   ` Dave Chinner
2023-05-04 18:14     ` John Garry
2023-05-04 22:26       ` Dave Chinner
2023-05-05  7:54         ` John Garry
2023-05-05 22:00           ` Darrick J. Wong
2023-05-07  1:59             ` Martin K. Petersen
2023-05-05 23:18           ` Dave Chinner
2023-05-06  9:38             ` John Garry
2023-05-07  2:35             ` Martin K. Petersen
2023-05-05 22:47         ` Eric Biggers
2023-05-05 23:31           ` Dave Chinner
2023-05-06  0:08             ` Eric Biggers
2023-05-09  0:19   ` Mike Snitzer
2023-05-17 17:02     ` John Garry
2023-05-03 18:38 ` [PATCH RFC 02/16] fs/bdev: Add atomic write support info to statx John Garry
2023-05-03 21:58   ` Dave Chinner
2023-05-04  8:45     ` John Garry
2023-05-04 22:40       ` Dave Chinner
2023-05-05  8:01         ` John Garry
2023-05-05 22:04           ` Darrick J. Wong [this message]
2023-05-03 18:38 ` [PATCH RFC 03/16] xfs: Support atomic write for statx John Garry
2023-05-03 22:17   ` Dave Chinner
2023-05-05 22:10     ` Darrick J. Wong
2023-05-03 18:38 ` [PATCH RFC 04/16] fs: Add RWF_ATOMIC and IOCB_ATOMIC flags for atomic write support John Garry
2023-05-03 18:38 ` [PATCH RFC 05/16] block: Add REQ_ATOMIC flag John Garry
2023-05-03 18:38 ` [PATCH RFC 06/16] block: Limit atomic writes according to bio and queue limits John Garry
2023-05-03 18:53   ` Keith Busch
2023-05-04  8:24     ` John Garry
2023-05-03 18:38 ` [PATCH RFC 07/16] block: Add bdev_find_max_atomic_write_alignment() John Garry
2023-05-03 18:38 ` [PATCH RFC 08/16] block: Add support for atomic_write_unit John Garry
2023-05-03 18:38 ` [PATCH RFC 09/16] block: Add blk_validate_atomic_write_op() John Garry
2023-05-03 18:38 ` [PATCH RFC 10/16] block: Add fops atomic write support John Garry
2023-05-03 18:38 ` [PATCH RFC 11/16] fs: iomap: Atomic " John Garry
2023-05-04  5:00   ` Dave Chinner
2023-05-05 21:19     ` Darrick J. Wong
2023-05-05 23:56       ` Dave Chinner
2023-05-03 18:38 ` [PATCH RFC 12/16] xfs: Add support for fallocate2 John Garry
2023-05-03 23:26   ` Dave Chinner
2023-05-05 22:23     ` Darrick J. Wong
2023-05-05 23:42       ` Dave Chinner
2023-05-03 18:38 ` [PATCH RFC 13/16] scsi: sd: Support reading atomic properties from block limits VPD John Garry
2023-05-03 18:38 ` [PATCH RFC 14/16] scsi: sd: Add WRITE_ATOMIC_16 support John Garry
2023-05-03 18:48   ` Bart Van Assche
2023-05-04  8:17     ` John Garry
2023-05-03 18:38 ` [PATCH RFC 15/16] scsi: scsi_debug: Atomic write support John Garry
2023-05-03 18:38 ` [PATCH RFC 16/16] nvme: Support atomic writes John Garry
2023-05-03 18:49   ` Bart Van Assche
2023-05-04  8:19     ` John Garry

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=20230505220439.GK15394@frogsfrogsfrogs \
    --to=djwong@kernel.org \
    --cc=axboe@kernel.dk \
    --cc=brauner@kernel.org \
    --cc=david@fromorbit.com \
    --cc=dchinner@redhat.com \
    --cc=hch@lst.de \
    --cc=jejb@linux.ibm.com \
    --cc=jmorris@namei.org \
    --cc=john.g.garry@oracle.com \
    --cc=kbusch@kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-block@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-nvme@lists.infradead.org \
    --cc=linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-security-module@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-xfs@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=martin.petersen@oracle.com \
    --cc=paul@paul-moore.com \
    --cc=prasad.singamsetty@oracle.com \
    --cc=sagi@grimberg.me \
    --cc=serge@hallyn.com \
    --cc=viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk \
    /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).