On Thu, Dec 12, 2024 at 12:40:07PM -0800, Darrick J. Wong wrote: > > However, I still think that we should be able to atomic write mixed extents, > > even though it is a pain to implement. To that end, I could be convinced > > again that we don't require it... > > Well... if you /did/ add a few entries to include/uapi/linux/fs.h for > ways that an untorn write can fail, then we could define the programming > interface as so: > > "If you receive -EBADMAP, then call fallocate(FALLOC_FL_MAKE_OVERWRITE) > to force all the mappings to pure overwrites." Ewwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwww. That's not a sane API in any way. > ...since there have been a few people who have asked about that ability > so that they can write+fdatasync without so much overhead from file > metadata updates. And all of them fundamentally misunderstood file system semantics and/or used weird bypasses that are dommed to corrupt the file system sooner or later.
