Re: fall back from direct to buffered I/O when stable writes are required

[Christoph Hellwig]

On Fri, Nov 14, 2025 at 01:31:20PM +0100, Kevin Wolf wrote:
> My main point above was that RAID and (potentially passed through) PI
> are independent of each other and I think that's still true with or
> without multiple stability levels.
> 
> If you don't have these levels, you just have to treat level 1 and 2 the
> same, i.e. bounce all the time if the kernel needs the guarantee (which
> is not for userspace PI, unless the same request needs the bounce buffer
> for another reason in a different place like RAID). That might be less
> optimal, but still correct and better than what happens today because at
> least you don't bounce for level 0 any more.

Agreed.

> If there is something you can optimise by delegating the responsibility
> to userspace in some cases - like you can prove that only the
> application itself would be harmed by doing things wrong - then having
> level 1 separate could certainly be interesting. In this case, I'd
> consider adding an RWF_* flag for userspace to make the promise even
> outside PI passthrough. But while potentially worthwhile, it feels like
> this is a separate optimisation from what you tried to address here.

Agreed as well.

In fact I'm kinda lost what we're even arguing about :)