On Mon, Mar 17, 2025 at 10:49:55AM -0400, Kent Overstreet wrote: > But we do absolutely require checking for transient read errors, and we > will miss things and corrupt data unnecessarily without FUA reads that > bypass the controller cache.
Read FUA doesn't "bypass the controller cache". This is a "flush cache first, then read the result" operation. That description seems consistent for nvme, ata, and scsi. You are only interested in the case where the read doesn't overlap with any dirty cache, so the "flush" part isn't a factor. Okay fine, but I'm still curious if you have actually seen a case where read data was corrupt in cache but correct with FUA?
