Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 2620:137:e000::1:20 as permitted sender) client-ip=2620:137:e000::1:20;
Date:   Thu, 29 Sep 2022 18:39:31 +0200
From:   Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de>
To:     Keith Busch <kbusch@kernel.org>
Cc:     Maxim Levitsky <mlevitsk@redhat.com>, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
        linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de>,
        qemu-devel@nongnu.org, kvm@vger.kernel.org,
        Kevin Wolf <kwolf@redhat.com>
Subject: Re: Commit 'iomap: add support for dma aligned direct-io' causes
 qemu/KVM boot failures
Message-ID: <20220929163931.GA10232@lst.de>
References: <fb869c88bd48ea9018e1cc349918aa7cdd524931.camel@redhat.com> <YzW+Mz12JT1BXoZA@kbusch-mbp.dhcp.thefacebook.com> <a2825beac032fd6a76838164d4e2753d30305897.camel@redhat.com> <YzXJwmP8pa3WABEG@kbusch-mbp.dhcp.thefacebook.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <YzXJwmP8pa3WABEG@kbusch-mbp.dhcp.thefacebook.com>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.17 (2007-11-01)
Precedence: bulk

On Thu, Sep 29, 2022 at 10:37:22AM -0600, Keith Busch wrote:
> I don't think so. Memory alignment and length granularity are two completely
> different concepts. If anything, the kernel's ABI had been that the length
> requirement was also required for the memory alignment, not the other way
> around. That usage will continue working with this kernel patch.

Well, Linus does treat anything that breaks significant userspace
as a regression.  Qemu certainly is significant, but that might depend
on bit how common configurations hitting this issue are.