public inbox for [email protected]
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: David Wei <[email protected]>
To: Kanchan Joshi <[email protected]>,
	[email protected], [email protected], [email protected],
	[email protected]
Cc: [email protected], [email protected],
	[email protected], Anuj Gupta <[email protected]>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 1/4] io_uring/rw: Get rid of flags field in struct io_rw
Date: Wed, 27 Mar 2024 16:32:21 -0700	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <[email protected]> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <[email protected]>

On 2024-03-27 16:30, David Wei wrote:
> On 2024-03-22 11:50, Kanchan Joshi wrote:
>> From: Anuj Gupta <[email protected]>
>>
>> Get rid of the flags field in io_rw. Flags can be set in kiocb->flags
>> during prep rather than doing it while issuing the I/O in io_read/io_write.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Anuj Gupta <[email protected]>
>> ---
>>  io_uring/rw.c | 22 +++++++++++-----------
>>  1 file changed, 11 insertions(+), 11 deletions(-)
> 
> This patch looks fine and is a no-op on its own, but I think there is a
> subtle semantic change. If the rw_flags is invalid (i.e.
> kiocb_set_rw_flags() returns an err) and prep() fails, then the
> remaining submissions won't be submitted unless IORING_SETUP_SUBMIT_ALL
> is set.
> 
> Currently if kiocb_set_rw_flags() fails in prep(), only the request will
> fail.

Sorry, that should say fails in _issue()_.

  reply	other threads:[~2024-03-27 23:32 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 11+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
     [not found] <CGME20240322185729epcas5p350c5054b5b519a6aa9d1b35ba3709563@epcas5p3.samsung.com>
2024-03-22 18:50 ` [RFC PATCH 0/4] Read/Write with meta buffer Kanchan Joshi
     [not found]   ` <CGME20240322185731epcas5p20fc525f793a537310f7b3ae5ba5bc75b@epcas5p2.samsung.com>
2024-03-22 18:50     ` [RFC PATCH 1/4] io_uring/rw: Get rid of flags field in struct io_rw Kanchan Joshi
2024-03-27 23:30       ` David Wei
2024-03-27 23:32         ` David Wei [this message]
     [not found]   ` <CGME20240322185734epcas5p2cd407dac97cd157c1833c4022ea84805@epcas5p2.samsung.com>
2024-03-22 18:50     ` [RFC PATCH 2/4] io_uring/rw: support read/write with metadata Kanchan Joshi
     [not found]   ` <CGME20240322185736epcas5p3d0093948e9904e775994bcbe735ea0c5@epcas5p3.samsung.com>
2024-03-22 18:50     ` [RFC PATCH 3/4] block: modify bio_integrity_map_user to accept iov_iter as argument Kanchan Joshi
     [not found]   ` <CGME20240322185738epcas5p20e5bd448ce83350eb9e79c929c4a9b2b@epcas5p2.samsung.com>
2024-03-22 18:50     ` [RFC PATCH 4/4] block: add support to pass the meta buffer Kanchan Joshi
2024-03-27 23:38   ` [RFC PATCH 0/4] Read/Write with " Jens Axboe
2024-03-28 12:03     ` Kanchan Joshi
2024-04-06 21:30   ` Pavel Begunkov
2024-04-25 19:05     ` Kanchan Joshi

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    [email protected] \
    [email protected] \
    [email protected] \
    [email protected] \
    [email protected] \
    [email protected] \
    [email protected] \
    [email protected] \
    [email protected] \
    [email protected] \
    [email protected] \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox