Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 23.128.96.36 as permitted sender) client-ip=23.128.96.36;
Message-ID: <2bb2a4d0-4f1f-45f1-9196-f5d0d8ee1878@acm.org>
Date:   Fri, 6 Oct 2023 10:22:08 -0700
MIME-Version: 1.0
User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird
Subject: Re: [PATCH 10/21] block: Add fops atomic write support
Content-Language: en-US
To:     Dave Chinner <david@fromorbit.com>
Cc:     "Martin K. Petersen" <martin.petersen@oracle.com>,
        John Garry <john.g.garry@oracle.com>, axboe@kernel.dk,
        kbusch@kernel.org, hch@lst.de, sagi@grimberg.me,
        jejb@linux.ibm.com, djwong@kernel.org, viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk,
        brauner@kernel.org, chandan.babu@oracle.com, dchinner@redhat.com,
        linux-block@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
        linux-nvme@lists.infradead.org, linux-xfs@vger.kernel.org,
        linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, tytso@mit.edu, jbongio@google.com,
        linux-api@vger.kernel.org
References: <5d26fa3b-ec34-bc39-ecfe-4616a04977ca@oracle.com>
 <b7a6f380-c6fa-45e0-b727-ba804c6684e4@acm.org>
 <yq1lecktuoo.fsf@ca-mkp.ca.oracle.com>
 <db6a950b-1308-4ca1-9f75-6275118bdcf5@acm.org>
 <yq1h6n7rume.fsf@ca-mkp.ca.oracle.com>
 <34c08488-a288-45f9-a28f-a514a408541d@acm.org>
 <yq1ttr6qoqp.fsf@ca-mkp.ca.oracle.com>
 <a2077ddf-9a8f-4101-aeb9-605d6dee3c6e@acm.org>
 <ZR86Z1OcO52a4BtH@dread.disaster.area>
 <d976868a-d32c-43d1-b5da-ebbc4c8de468@acm.org>
 <ZR+NiYIuKzEilkW3@dread.disaster.area>
From:   Bart Van Assche <bvanassche@acm.org>
In-Reply-To: <ZR+NiYIuKzEilkW3@dread.disaster.area>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Precedence: bulk

On 10/5/23 21:31, Dave Chinner wrote:
> Then I don't see what your concern is.
> 
> Single sector writes are guaranteed atomic and have been for as long 
> as I've worked in this game. OTOH, multi-sector writes are not 
> guaranteed to be atomic - they can get torn on sector boundaries, but
> the individual sectors within that write are guaranteed to be 
> all-or-nothing.
> 
> Any hardware device that does not guarantee single sector write 
> atomicity (i.e. tears in the middle of a sector) is, by definition, 
> broken. And we all know that broken hardware means nothing in the 
> storage stack works as it should, so I just don't see what point you 
> are trying to make...

Do you agree that the above implies that it is not useful in patch 01/21
of this series to track atomic_write_unit_min_bytes in the block layer
nor to export this information to user space? The above implies that
this parameter will always be equal to the logical block size. Writes to
a single physical block happen atomically. If there are multiple logical
blocks per physical block, the block device must serialize 
read/modify/write cycles internally.

Thanks,

Bart.