On Mon, Nov 07, 2022 at 09:12:57PM +0900, Damien Le Moal wrote: > On 11/7/22 14:50, Christoph Hellwig wrote: > > On Mon, Nov 07, 2022 at 09:50:19AM +0900, Damien Le Moal wrote: > >> Finally, since the block layer should never issue a FUA read > >> request, warn in ata_build_rw_tf() if we see such request. > > > > Couldn't this be triggered using SG_IO passthrough with a SCSI > > WRITE* command that has the FUA bit set? > > Yes indeed. Should I drop the warn ? I think the warn needs to go. But don't we also need to handle the non-NCQ fua case if we don't want to break pure passthrough appliations? Or do we simply not care? In the latter case we'll at least need a comment documenting that tradeoff.
