On Tue, Aug 12, 2025 at 01:35:56PM -0600, Keith Busch wrote: > On Mon, Aug 11, 2025 at 10:26:03AM -0400, Kent Overstreet wrote: > > On the other hand, for the only incidences I can remotely refer to in > > the past year and a half, there has been: > ... > > > - the block layer developer who went on a four email rant where he, > > charitably, misread the spec or the patchset or both; all this over a > > patch to simply bring a warning in line with the actual NVME and SCSI > > specs. > > Are you talking about this thread? > > https://lore.kernel.org/linux-block/20250311201518.3573009-14-kent.overstreet@xxxxxxxxx/ > > I try to closely follow those lists, and that's the only thread I recall > that even slightly rings a bell from your description, however it's not > an accurate description (you were the one who misread the specs there; I > tried to help bridge the gap). I recall the interaction was pretty tame > though, so maybe you're talking about something else. Perhaps a link for > context if I got it wrong? I've since seen a lot of actual test data from SCSI hard drives - fua reads are definitely not cached, without exception across manufacturers. On NVME the situation is much murkier.
