On Fri, May 16, 2025 at 10:48:17AM -0400, Theodore Ts'o wrote: > On Fri, May 16, 2025 at 03:31:17PM +0200, Carlos Maiolino wrote: > > > > This is likely the final state for XFS merge-window and I hope to > > send it to Linus as soon as the merge window opens. > > Very cool! > > I've taken a quick peek, and it looks like the only XFS-specific > atomic writes is an XFS mount option. Am I missing anything? > > I want to keep merging the ext4 and xfs atomic write patchsets simple, > so I'd prefer not to have any git-level dependencies on the branches. > If we're confident that the xfs changes are going to land at the next > merge window, /I/ for one hope that the xfs changes land this time around. > given that the ext4 patch set is pretty much ready to > land in the ext4 tree, how about updating the documentation in a > follow-up patch. > > I can either append the commit which generalizes the documentation to > the ext4 tree, or if it turns out that there is a v6 needed of the > ext4 atomic write patchset, we can fold the documentation update into > the "ext4: add atomic block write documentation" commit and rename it > to "Documentation: add atomic write block documentation." > > Does that seem reasonable? I think it's ok to combine them after the merge. It would be useful to have a single programmer's guide that takes a person through the whole process of determining the block device's atomic write capabilities, formatting either an XFS or ext4 filesystem appropriately, and then presents a toy program to discover the atomic write limits on an open file and uses that to queue a single IO. --D > > Cheers, > > - Ted >
