linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 4/4] xfs: fallback to buffered I/O for direct I/O when stable writes are required

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <c3512f2a-f995-4642-8eb9-a227890ba856@suse.com>
Date: Thu, 30 Oct 2025 17:44:22 +1030
From: Qu Wenruo <wqu@...e.com>
To: Christoph Hellwig <hch@....de>, Qu Wenruo <wqu@...e.com>
Cc: "Darrick J. Wong" <djwong@...nel.org>, Carlos Maiolino <cem@...nel.org>,
 Christian Brauner <brauner@...nel.org>, Jan Kara <jack@...e.cz>,
 "Martin K. Petersen" <martin.petersen@...cle.com>,
 linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-xfs@...r.kernel.org,
 linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org, linux-raid@...r.kernel.org,
 linux-block@...r.kernel.org, linux-btrfs@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 4/4] xfs: fallback to buffered I/O for direct I/O when
 stable writes are required

在 2025/10/30 17:25, Christoph Hellwig 写道:
> On Thu, Oct 30, 2025 at 05:23:32PM +1030, Qu Wenruo wrote:
>>> So what is your application going to do if the open fails?
>>
>> If it can not accept buffered fallback, error out.
> 
> Why would it not be able to accept that?
> 

Because for whatever reasons, although the only reason I can come up 
with is performance.

I thought the old kernel principle is, providing the mechanism not the 
policy.
But the fallback-to-buffered looks more like a policy, and if that's the 
case user space should be more suitable.

Thanks,
Qu