Re: [PATCH 2/2] ubifs: Allow O_DIRECT

[Dongsheng Yang]

On 08/20/2015 02:42 PM, Richard Weinberger wrote:
> Yang, (Sorry if I've used your last name lately)

Haha, that's fine. My friends in China all call me Dongsheng. :)
> 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.

Hmmm, then I am okey with this idea now.
> > 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.

Yes, agree. So let's return 0 currently.

Yang
> Thanks,
> //richard
> .

--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/