lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2023]   [Oct]   [4]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
SubjectRe: [PATCH 01/21] block: Add atomic write operations to request_queue limits
From
On 10/3/23 20:00, Martin K. Petersen wrote:
>
> Bart,
>
>> also that there are no guarantees that the data written by an atomic
>> write will survive a power failure. See also the difference between
>> the NVMe parameters AWUN and AWUPF.
>
> We only care about *PF. The *N variants were cut from the same cloth as
> TRIM and UNMAP.

Hi Martin,

Has the following approach been considered? RWF_ATOMIC only guarantees
atomicity. Persistence is not guaranteed without fsync() / fdatasync().

I think this would be more friendly towards battery-powered devices
(smartphones). On these devices it can be safe to skip fsync() /
fdatasync() if the battery level is high enough.

Thanks,

Bart.



\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2023-10-04 23:02    [W:0.155 / U:1.780 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site