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 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-7.2 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,NICE_REPLY_A, SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS,USER_AGENT_SANE_1 autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4C1E8C433F5 for ; Wed, 15 Sep 2021 01:14:04 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 316BF61164 for ; Wed, 15 Sep 2021 01:14:04 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S231770AbhIOBPV (ORCPT ); Tue, 14 Sep 2021 21:15:21 -0400 Received: from lindbergh.monkeyblade.net ([23.128.96.19]:48040 "EHLO lindbergh.monkeyblade.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S231865AbhIOBPU (ORCPT ); Tue, 14 Sep 2021 21:15:20 -0400 Received: from mail-io1-xd35.google.com (mail-io1-xd35.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::d35]) by lindbergh.monkeyblade.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id E562CC061574 for ; Tue, 14 Sep 2021 18:14:02 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-io1-xd35.google.com with SMTP id j18so1285440ioj.8 for ; Tue, 14 Sep 2021 18:14:02 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=kernel-dk.20150623.gappssmtp.com; s=20150623; h=subject:to:references:from:message-id:date:user-agent:mime-version :in-reply-to:content-language:content-transfer-encoding; bh=3Khs5aZZOAa0vkghDAwrJLJLlL2og03vwiD5udEW5iw=; b=Tz8iDgW3Doij9oqTy9X3oWWJ8zj/shdOBFPKA1XezfTYCLp5SfIxJi2e4/xzUWZUBG PhVAd8MOo0gjrgZzVu0MVFh14zWm7yOolc9BRIB7AN/qBSMfb5ZB+2vDxyKJ00nGA+g9 XQRGwUbtluJIt8SBXfRRX7z8CaHUEn3VWCxsDY4H3ajrFRDd6G3EPAyusfU6m9myb5gT ecJw+QfWibilbKvsmiSezWMGuSmjWbWL0PhPqz4qASqBY98imegm78AuKm29nF7xEFTM cmVlpcNQRmcMHhv/AVQyvS3mTE2w2CAxJK2DzxZYoTIVgv+5DrAMGJab7+4i2GVrStdg KTVg== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20210112; h=x-gm-message-state:subject:to:references:from:message-id:date :user-agent:mime-version:in-reply-to:content-language :content-transfer-encoding; bh=3Khs5aZZOAa0vkghDAwrJLJLlL2og03vwiD5udEW5iw=; b=JtHNrRFeXJSCw4p6sNuPxvIagagZobX7i93jFAD78C+8HkqQtNQLWWHi6tGyd+w6Vc uO5wS62IcmBG2JXNgWIYJNW14LAyoLlzrDL7V/Peqomljm/eu+lWdvYq5tpP/Yljq2hq VbzbN/t6fh2J2u7gHxZZkWSS21hHk79zYyPtHvBCV+0g/8XxWg4u8lyaYP7+7GQBcWYe AH06QjJt6yPhoQCT4BryDwnRRYhy+gOdfQJdw9JpA0+Io1rHEC2CdGzfoi7HTpwlMr+U mU96zzFo8jK4AuzsW7SqDgFHBmXYSiCAYm1G+dcq23IMYZoALKWX9XSxQZNGVdW+lPxt 9Ozg== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM530aYSUHJOIMl5rD0+MVv2u0TR7PERkiv1QI8V7zXeONVjKT3HnE I/6sZEe3TNbl2YE8U6wUCjWYudNmpdh4XQ== X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJzYwr9JXk34ufOElCT5nDq93Ner81L9MSEk6CEj+cNeB8mcg3VrXUbbTKki6QLsVHkL5R8O7g== X-Received: by 2002:a05:6638:2257:: with SMTP id m23mr17424963jas.137.1631668442059; Tue, 14 Sep 2021 18:14:02 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [192.168.1.116] ([66.219.217.159]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id a20sm8149573ilt.8.2021.09.14.18.14.01 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 bits=128/128); Tue, 14 Sep 2021 18:14:01 -0700 (PDT) Subject: Re: [PATCH] io_uring: move iopoll reissue into regular IO path To: Pavel Begunkov , io-uring@vger.kernel.org References: <09c645bdf78117a5933490aff0eea10c4f1ceb0a.1631658805.git.asml.silence@gmail.com> From: Jens Axboe Message-ID: Date: Tue, 14 Sep 2021 19:14:01 -0600 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:68.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/68.10.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <09c645bdf78117a5933490aff0eea10c4f1ceb0a.1631658805.git.asml.silence@gmail.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Language: en-US Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: io-uring@vger.kernel.org On 9/14/21 4:34 PM, Pavel Begunkov wrote: > 230d50d448acb ("io_uring: move reissue into regular IO path") > made non-IOPOLL I/O to not retry from ki_complete handler. Follow it > steps and do the same for IOPOLL. Same problems, same implementation, > same -EAGAIN assumptions. This looks good to me. But I don't think it's against io_uring-5.15? Trivial reject, but looks like -next to me. -- Jens Axboe