Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1752469AbbHTGmN (ORCPT ); Thu, 20 Aug 2015 02:42:13 -0400 Received: from a.ns.miles-group.at ([95.130.255.143]:11950 "EHLO radon.swed.at" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751443AbbHTGmL (ORCPT ); Thu, 20 Aug 2015 02:42:11 -0400 Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] ubifs: Allow O_DIRECT To: Dongsheng Yang , linux-mtd@lists.infradead.org References: <1440016553-26481-1-git-send-email-richard@nod.at> <1440016553-26481-2-git-send-email-richard@nod.at> <55D542C5.6040500@cn.fujitsu.com> Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, dedekind1@gmail.com From: Richard Weinberger Message-ID: <55D576BE.5040207@nod.at> Date: Thu, 20 Aug 2015 08:42:06 +0200 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:38.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/38.1.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <55D542C5.6040500@cn.fujitsu.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1438 Lines: 38 Yang, (Sorry if I've used your last name lately) Am 20.08.2015 um 05:00 schrieb Dongsheng Yang: > On 08/20/2015 04:35 AM, Richard Weinberger wrote: >> Currently UBIFS does not support direct IO, but some applications >> blindly use the O_DIRECT flag. >> Instead of failing upon open() we can do better and fall back >> to buffered IO. > > Hmmmm, to be honest, I am not sure we have to do it as Dave > suggested. I think that's just a work-around for current fstests. > > IMHO, perform a buffered IO when user request direct IO without > any warning sounds not a good idea. Maybe adding a warning would > make it better. Well, how would you inform the user? A printk() to dmesg is useless are the vast majority of open() callers do not check dmesg... :) Major filesystems implement ->direct_IO these days and having a "return 0"-stub seems to be legit. For example exofs does too. So, I really don't consider it a work around. > I think we need more discussion about AIO&DIO in ubifs, and actually > I have a plan for it. But I have not listed the all cons and pros of > it so far. Sure, having a real ->direct_IO would be be best solution. My patch won't block this. Thanks, //richard -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/