Messages in this thread | | | Date | Thu, 6 Oct 2022 15:06:28 +0200 | From | "Maciej S. Szmigiero" <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH 2/2] ata: allow enabling FUA support in Kconfig |
| |
On 6.10.2022 01:38, Damien Le Moal wrote: > On 9/27/22 04:51, Maciej S. Szmigiero wrote: >> From: "Maciej S. Szmigiero" <maciej.szmigiero@oracle.com> >> >> Currently, if one wants to make use of FUA support in libata it is >> necessary to provide an explicit kernel command line parameter in order to >> enable it (for drives that report such support). >> >> In terms of Git archaeology: FUA support was enabled by default in early >> libata versions but was disabled soon after. >> Since then there were a few attempts to enable this support by default: >> [1] (for NCQ drives only), [2] (for all drives). >> However, the second change had to be reverted after a report came of >> an incompatibility with the HDD in 2011 Mac Mini. >> >> Enabling FUA avoids having to emulate it by issuing an extra drive cache >> flush for every request that have this flag set. >> Since FUA support is required by the ATA/ATAPI spec for any drive that >> supports LBA48 and so these days should be pretty widespread let's provide >> an ability to enable it by default in Kconfig. > > This can be done by adding "libata.fua=1" to the CONFIG_CMDLINE option. So > I do not see the need to add yet another config option.
A specific Kconfig option is more structured than a free-form CONFIG_CMDLINE (which is also technically a per-arch option, but seems to be widely supported across arches).
That's why there is a lot (100+) of similar Kconfig default-changing options, a quick sample of these (in no particular order): SOUND_OSS_CORE_PRECLAIM, SND_INTEL_BYT_PREFER_SOF, LSM, SECURITY_SELINUX_CHECKREQPROT_VALUE, SECURITY_LOADPIN_ENFORCE, SECURITY_APPARMOR_DEBUG_MESSAGES, IP_VS_TAB_BITS, IP_SET_MAX, MAC80211_HAS_RC, SLUB_DEBUG_ON, KFENCE_SAMPLE_INTERVAL, PRINTK_TIME, DEBUG_OBJECTS_ENABLE_DEFAULT, RCU_NOCB_CPU_DEFAULT_ALL, ...
libata currently has only one similar option: SATA_MOBILE_LPM_POLICY, so it's not like a person performing kernel configuration is overloaded with questions here.
But at the same time, I respect your decision as a maintainer of this code.
> > Patch 1 looks good. I will queue it up once rc1 is out.
Thanks, Maciej
| |