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 16:30:36 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <[email protected]> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <[email protected]>
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.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2024-03-27 23:30 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 [this message]
2024-03-27 23:32 ` David Wei
[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