From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7C312C433EF for ; Mon, 4 Apr 2022 07:09:15 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1350172AbiDDHLI (ORCPT ); Mon, 4 Apr 2022 03:11:08 -0400 Received: from lindbergh.monkeyblade.net ([23.128.96.19]:47350 "EHLO lindbergh.monkeyblade.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S234427AbiDDHLI (ORCPT ); Mon, 4 Apr 2022 03:11:08 -0400 Received: from verein.lst.de (verein.lst.de [213.95.11.211]) by lindbergh.monkeyblade.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 42B6E381BA for ; Mon, 4 Apr 2022 00:09:13 -0700 (PDT) Received: by verein.lst.de (Postfix, from userid 2407) id 3961268AFE; Mon, 4 Apr 2022 09:09:10 +0200 (CEST) Date: Mon, 4 Apr 2022 09:09:10 +0200 From: Christoph Hellwig To: Kanchan Joshi Cc: axboe@kernel.dk, hch@lst.de, io-uring@vger.kernel.org, linux-nvme@lists.infradead.org, asml.silence@gmail.com, ming.lei@redhat.com, mcgrof@kernel.org, pankydev8@gmail.com, javier@javigon.com, joshiiitr@gmail.com, anuj20.g@samsung.com Subject: Re: [RFC 2/5] fs: add file_operations->async_cmd() Message-ID: <20220404070910.GB444@lst.de> References: <20220401110310.611869-1-joshi.k@samsung.com> <20220401110310.611869-3-joshi.k@samsung.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20220401110310.611869-3-joshi.k@samsung.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.17 (2007-11-01) Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: io-uring@vger.kernel.org On Fri, Apr 01, 2022 at 04:33:07PM +0530, Kanchan Joshi wrote: > From: Jens Axboe > > This is a file private handler, similar to ioctls but hopefully a lot > more sane and useful. Without the next patch this is rather pointless (and confusing), so I'd suggest to move it into that. > int (*fadvise)(struct file *, loff_t, loff_t, int); > + int (*async_cmd)(struct io_uring_cmd *ioucmd); Given that it takes a io_uring_cmd argument I also thnink that the name is a bit misleading. Caling this uring_cmd or io_uring_cmd would be more descriptive.