From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from verein.lst.de (verein.lst.de [213.95.11.211]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 9C6CD17738; Tue, 13 Feb 2024 06:55:23 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=213.95.11.211 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1707807325; cv=none; b=s33hCAGYB1UVA4N+SZkoRAp5pK9DhYCubsY4wzT5Kn4/UdX++dvex43xmTYT3qOLWq1vJNIEOhdmoZz0mMUT11MrcCi6LMliKWzUjZZbLBxGBdw1K1CBQSIuH2/OPahB54ysAX+C41+dW8h3v0koDJN5OkNB0ShBP7VZLRasbYI= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1707807325; c=relaxed/simple; bh=sJndHr+QR3Sb0xFn88/CCsJXnbajrdSNA3G1r0JM6JE=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:Message-ID:References:MIME-Version: Content-Type:Content-Disposition:In-Reply-To; b=daPIBOkTGZHXGEI5rfWRaDoP9IpgviX3tlvJ8PvX5+2p3nhr5MM1mv70aZKn8jHFYPNGwnCGiZK1nnYocGParP+8o3Ye7MvuoCjUHrZiluJCP35ZMeOBO0JiNE0BxzOdg+1fI/kUUtWwrODcpperLLCG0PgiSuLjPov7ouWVBuo= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=lst.de; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=lst.de; arc=none smtp.client-ip=213.95.11.211 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=lst.de Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=lst.de Received: by verein.lst.de (Postfix, from userid 2407) id 498E9227A87; Tue, 13 Feb 2024 07:55:19 +0100 (CET) Date: Tue, 13 Feb 2024 07:55:18 +0100 From: Christoph Hellwig To: John Garry Cc: "Darrick J. Wong" , hch@lst.de, viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk, brauner@kernel.org, dchinner@redhat.com, jack@suse.cz, chandan.babu@oracle.com, martin.petersen@oracle.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-xfs@vger.kernel.org, linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, tytso@mit.edu, jbongio@google.com, ojaswin@linux.ibm.com Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/6] fs: iomap: Atomic write support Message-ID: <20240213065518.GA23539@lst.de> References: <20240124142645.9334-1-john.g.garry@oracle.com> <20240124142645.9334-2-john.g.garry@oracle.com> <20240202172513.GZ6226@frogsfrogsfrogs> <2f91a71e-413b-47b6-8bc9-a60c86ed6f6b@oracle.com> Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <2f91a71e-413b-47b6-8bc9-a60c86ed6f6b@oracle.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.17 (2007-11-01) On Mon, Feb 05, 2024 at 11:29:57AM +0000, John Garry wrote: >> >> Also, what's the meaning of REQ_OP_READ | REQ_ATOMIC? > > REQ_ATOMIC will be ignored for REQ_OP_READ. I'm following the same policy > as something like RWF_SYNC for a read. We've been rather sloppy with these flags in the past, which isn't a good thing. Let's add proper checking for new interfaces.