On 08/15, Eric Biggers wrote: > On Sat, Jul 30, 2022 at 08:08:26PM -0700, Jaegeuk Kim wrote: > > On 07/25, Eric Biggers wrote: > > > On Sat, Jul 23, 2022 at 07:01:59PM -0700, Jaegeuk Kim wrote: > > > > On 07/22, Eric Biggers wrote: > > > > > From: Eric Biggers <[email protected]> > > > > > > > > > > Currently, if an f2fs filesystem is mounted with the mode=lfs and > > > > > io_bits mount options, DIO reads are allowed but DIO writes are not. > > > > > Allowing DIO reads but not DIO writes is an unusual restriction, which > > > > > is likely to be surprising to applications, namely any application > > > > > that > > > > > both reads and writes from a file (using O_DIRECT). This behavior is > > > > > also incompatible with the proposed STATX_DIOALIGN extension to statx. > > > > > Given this, let's drop the support for DIO reads in this > > > > > configuration. > > > > > > > > IIRC, we allowed DIO reads since applications complained a lower > > > > performance. > > > > So, I'm afraid this change will make another confusion to users. Could > > > > you please apply the new bahavior only for STATX_DIOALIGN? > > > > > > > > > > Well, the issue is that the proposed STATX_DIOALIGN fields cannot > > > represent this > > > weird case where DIO reads are allowed but not DIO writes. So the > > > question is > > > whether this case actually matters, in which case we should make > > > STATX_DIOALIGN > > > distinguish between DIO reads and DIO writes, or whether it's some odd > > > edge case > > > that doesn't really matter, in which case we could just fix it or make > > > STATX_DIOALIGN report that DIO is unsupported. I was hoping that you had > > > some > > > insight here. What sort of applications want DIO reads but not DIO > > > writes? > > > Is this common at all? > > > > I think there's no specific application to use the LFS mode at this > > moment, but I'd like to allow DIO read for zoned device which will be > > used for Android devices. > > > > So if the zoned device feature becomes widely adopted, then STATX_DIOALIGN > will > be useless on all Android devices? That sounds undesirable.
Do you have a plan to adopt STATX_DIOALIGN in android? > Are you sure that > supporting DIO reads but not DIO writes actually works? Does it not cause > problems for existing applications? I haven't heard any issue so far. > > What we need to do is make a decision about whether this means we should build > in a stx_dio_direction field (indicating no support / readonly support / > writeonly support / readwrite support) into the API from the beginning. If we > don't do that, then I don't think we could simply add such a field later, as > the > statx_dio_*_align fields will have already been assigned their meaning. I > think > we'd instead have to "duplicate" the API, with STATX_DIOROALIGN and > statx_dio_ro_*_align fields. That seems uglier than building a directional > indicator into the API from the beginning. On the other hand, requiring all > programs to check stx_dio_direction would add complexity to using the API. > > Any thoughts on this? I haven't seen the details of the implementation tho, why not supporting it only if filesystem has the same DIO RW policy? > > - Eric _______________________________________________ Linux-f2fs-devel mailing list [email protected] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/linux-f2fs-devel
