From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from mail-wm1-f49.google.com (mail-wm1-f49.google.com [209.85.128.49]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 58DB1309EE3 for ; Fri, 20 Feb 2026 22:35:26 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=209.85.128.49 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1771626927; cv=none; b=YxPuBK9zqkoJkw3Mx288G5WHtkkm4Df4f54Zn8Tej8dtNA7vyPyfzSG+TzbGaNpmQ3hA8SFPhg91p8+EzJR56OG9FtEW52+bEQnAxAJ+WybzQq6XIgIgRLtB85mbIPXyKt0FRdxKTkqnsP604mHLC3KSMKHXnQIVHXPPr+BYZ6I= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1771626927; c=relaxed/simple; bh=smZcoEAnOnGbWYQjTEx4wx5SsMpqu349Lu3q9NZylXE=; h=Message-ID:Date:MIME-Version:Subject:To:Cc:References:From: In-Reply-To:Content-Type; b=R8aCYxZ4qwM29RjifDPhv8t/m38v16bzsmnowtNMGZtMFRHnX7tw6e7m+WsS8x/nJJbrGZTC3PdHRGyErkVzxtuoFXN7mUNNLm8v6c8wyFK3YKcKovyRhCRCrpmEOmmznHW3Sl7ef9fIDnd9wpHhLRp4bcAM6smrZ6jwv+e8w4M= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=gmail.com; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=gmail.com; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com header.i=@gmail.com header.b=LuMGdiZt; arc=none smtp.client-ip=209.85.128.49 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=gmail.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=gmail.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com header.i=@gmail.com header.b="LuMGdiZt" Received: by mail-wm1-f49.google.com with SMTP id 5b1f17b1804b1-483a2338616so14420215e9.0 for ; Fri, 20 Feb 2026 14:35:26 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20230601; t=1771626925; x=1772231725; darn=vger.kernel.org; h=content-transfer-encoding:in-reply-to:from:content-language :references:cc:to:subject:user-agent:mime-version:date:message-id :from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:reply-to; bh=G2s/8SzLr1kQgVOYkjFZAPLW+HaH7/zQRc6LGXmo8T8=; b=LuMGdiZtIGXiPOqiMTVh85w5df5SxWALOuHvXa8LYn8GM6OnPCRLFNrOqEuqYBXOjb m5nbiQfpYj3zF2Sjx9s8u3iloTRDiwk9Az/iJbKEZDi3woDcFX0rcgTteG91TJzIqCJ0 bEZCQ0tI/05Q5Oofze0LQLj/4rllL/D5DwblPlZcgrwa8xTNoazSGy1fU9jVSeuvDCqg VAWM0/rUfK8HgOn2yN2V1qTjUISkKnAVy5a2IRR1LHFxQZnd1S91wZMYzWpAVmB7F5zU Iv/hYRtDMcTiuharygouoedW5F6YJsbu5tmvvo/7K/j4ACjuvHrKarTalwhZEWFhk2IN krcw== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20230601; t=1771626925; x=1772231725; h=content-transfer-encoding:in-reply-to:from:content-language :references:cc:to:subject:user-agent:mime-version:date:message-id :x-gm-gg:x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id :reply-to; bh=G2s/8SzLr1kQgVOYkjFZAPLW+HaH7/zQRc6LGXmo8T8=; b=WAP+7A9IPyjYPDCVbN74Dmb1hJQ/8V/M8KbBH+2lDxxy9QegyL7zc/NBv9TT4FLE4q eSfTSx8y+eCLj11qXmPgZR4Lez777Xq8MTbMqPFwXQUEx141EkSM00uXHNyvCxqHp4j4 s8zoIPEEW1WfN3FLZivHjTARcayrM/kDiZqWRE0yoJwha36RjmxFh8295kurTEp0kiC4 ieBAELEzqKVGhY79+eAhcz2tqskK7IU6Qc/VisB90Fyj0PyXdOvLTP/TMGGEZyjbdn8M UpJlhGg/c8TLEd2G0FfsbYmLHh7wjuqTmKqERkAYu71NVQsam6LZwVcEmvIqHgkQrcMN 8OgA== X-Gm-Message-State: AOJu0YwLB072ltPqI3f6ICb5eLgeAMTF49lCx+4gGOMhfbNwr+pjblom XMY7sCzdYeViA/g2cSNWLSZbH5RwibLMQ6fkEGEaFbqeGWSDkJRfbvFo X-Gm-Gg: AZuq6aLNYZcnWnN6pxM0b0GdauxIB6hFfOMXphyahUe1bxC8J/JLBDj7UriB3f199jU 84VTxxM8AI7lF0MJ9YXcnO9ROEpPA5aM244zobAuXIy+LVYpMvvYPH1pGPhrOkgDrch8O4d1wwb Y49u/bVlLJN5Q31klprUdyQYuC7B5OTs+EFvrLuzGgjb6Du5Tx6sCQuw4exGANzCMPgdHA4L711 whFm4NDi7YPV7AIcvwH4F2IXpnYpfcktbJRpAfacupFW8MpngNjKOCOHzpJJoLYVECCT4F9UcLp KFpnspIOWqdpkD04YSFSnJdEF655LAdATHcA/SLK2GzO9q0ojW/moPuyJIH7vW6w69pAyKz3mrt +vvfR0UHoEq4pDf2baJOu4UqWnYk2pd6si5kejkHWcHTwI+ApUFqt+eSorzdDtS8n25dLXUvIMY 5WdVUiBaF3vCzbbdQNpTnmN7ko/HMntXcxOyADmyFpgYRJ+dZaMwQ9nHp3FWHk1JLr8edI2uYDo wG5YpgOvzur7i5+Xq67b2AZkGxcDY8XclzGa26NAQWTC571aqDwI2ykLusBWyssc5VgCkC5MH4/ bQ== X-Received: by 2002:a05:600c:8a0a:20b0:483:7903:c3b1 with SMTP id 5b1f17b1804b1-483aaa168b0mr1609075e9.20.1771626924446; Fri, 20 Feb 2026 14:35:24 -0800 (PST) Received: from ?IPV6:2a01:4b00:bd21:4f00:7cc6:d3ca:494:116c? ([2a01:4b00:bd21:4f00:7cc6:d3ca:494:116c]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id 5b1f17b1804b1-483a31b3dd7sm101429365e9.2.2026.02.20.14.35.22 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 bits=128/128); Fri, 20 Feb 2026 14:35:22 -0800 (PST) Message-ID: <591a7f0e-7b78-42f1-9486-163249f5e306@gmail.com> Date: Fri, 20 Feb 2026 22:35:21 +0000 Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: io-uring@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird Subject: Re: [PATCH v8 5/5] selftests/io_uring: add a bpf io_uring selftest To: Alexei Starovoitov Cc: io-uring , bpf , Jens Axboe References: <7cc147a959ac068c55dae4f540e38e9e4ab121e0.1771327059.git.asml.silence@gmail.com> <84e2f3ad-28f0-4e9a-804f-2647cba9b30f@gmail.com> Content-Language: en-US From: Pavel Begunkov In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit On 2/20/26 17:45, Alexei Starovoitov wrote: > On Fri, Feb 20, 2026 at 3:41 AM Pavel Begunkov wrote: >> >> I had such examples, but selftests is not the best place for that. >> It can use abstractions, and I want to make them reusable instead >> of people copy-pasting from selftests. > > Sure, but please still post them as extra patches so it's easier > to see what's the end result. > > Also please reply to that thread: > https://lore.kernel.org/bpf/CALTww28QMg=YXqKWpWLZrLO+xiqOe3LGyput8dx68-dnQsxg=g@mail.gmail.com/ > > It's not clear to me whether your io_uring+bpf setup will work > for Xiao's use case. > I don't think we need 2 ways of doing it. We discussed this with Ming on the list before, that's one of the use cases I target as well, there is no reason why it shouldn't work. The difference is that this approach gives a flexible framework for extensibility and covers a good bunch of other needs, which is exactly the reason I moved from a BPF opcode approach, while Ming's proposal is more specific but argued to be a way easier to plug into ublk servers. If you ask me, we need a solution that covers a broader spectrum of use cases, but I guess it all can be argued in either way. But it'd be interesting to discuss how a BPF abstraction around registered buffers should look like. E.g. passing an index to all kfuncs like that, or making it a KF_ACQUIRE/RELEASE object, or maybe something else. I'll reply later. -- Pavel Begunkov