[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20170521070427.GB10453@infradead.org>
Date: Sun, 21 May 2017 00:04:27 -0700
From: Christoph Hellwig <hch@...radead.org>
To: Minchan Kim <minchan@...nel.org>
Cc: Sergey Senozhatsky <sergey.senozhatsky.work@...il.com>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Joonsoo Kim <iamjoonsoo.kim@....com>,
Sergey Senozhatsky <sergey.senozhatsky@...il.com>,
kernel-team <kernel-team@....com>, linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org,
linux-block@...r.kernel.org, hch@...radead.org,
viro@...iv.linux.org.uk, axboe@...nel.dk, jlayton@...hat.com,
tytso@....edu
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] zram: do not count duplicated pages as compressed
On Wed, May 17, 2017 at 05:32:12PM +0900, Minchan Kim wrote:
> Is block device(esp, zram which is compressed ram block device) okay to
> return garbage when ongoing overwrite IO fails?
>
> O_DIRECT write 4 block "aaa.." -> success
> read 4 block "aaa.." -> success
> O_DIRECT write 4 block "bbb.." -> fail
> read 4 block "000..' -> it is okay?
>
> Hope to get an answer form experts. :)
It's "okay" as it's what existing real block devices do (at least on a
sector boundary). It's not "nice" though, so if you can avoid it,
please do.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists