* [PATCH for-6.1 0/2] don't fallback if sock doesn't undestand zc
@ 2022-10-20 1:42 Pavel Begunkov
2022-10-20 1:42 ` [PATCH for-6.1 1/2] io_uring/net: fail zc send for unsupported protocols Pavel Begunkov
` (2 more replies)
0 siblings, 3 replies; 10+ messages in thread
From: Pavel Begunkov @ 2022-10-20 1:42 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: io-uring; +Cc: Jens Axboe, asml.silence, Stefan Metzmacher
Prefer failinig requests over copying when we're dealing with
protocols that don't support io_uring zerocopy send. The patches
are split to make backporting easier.
Pavel Begunkov (2):
io_uring/net: fail zc send for unsupported protocols
io_uring/net: fail zc sendmsg for unsupported protocols
io_uring/net.c | 11 +++++++++++
1 file changed, 11 insertions(+)
--
2.38.0
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 10+ messages in thread
* [PATCH for-6.1 1/2] io_uring/net: fail zc send for unsupported protocols
2022-10-20 1:42 [PATCH for-6.1 0/2] don't fallback if sock doesn't undestand zc Pavel Begunkov
@ 2022-10-20 1:42 ` Pavel Begunkov
2022-10-20 9:13 ` Stefan Metzmacher
2022-10-20 1:42 ` [PATCH for-6.1 2/2] io_uring/net: fail zc sendmsg " Pavel Begunkov
2022-10-20 2:26 ` [PATCH for-6.1 0/2] don't fallback if sock doesn't undestand zc Jens Axboe
2 siblings, 1 reply; 10+ messages in thread
From: Pavel Begunkov @ 2022-10-20 1:42 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: io-uring; +Cc: Jens Axboe, asml.silence, Stefan Metzmacher
If a protocol doesn't support zerocopy it will silently fall back to
copying. This type of behaviour has always been a source of troubles
so it's better to fail such requests instead. For now explicitly
whitelist supported protocols in io_uring, which should be turned later
into a socket flag.
Cc: <[email protected]> # 6.0
Signed-off-by: Pavel Begunkov <[email protected]>
---
io_uring/net.c | 9 +++++++++
1 file changed, 9 insertions(+)
diff --git a/io_uring/net.c b/io_uring/net.c
index 8c7226b5bf41..28127f1de1f0 100644
--- a/io_uring/net.c
+++ b/io_uring/net.c
@@ -120,6 +120,13 @@ static void io_netmsg_recycle(struct io_kiocb *req, unsigned int issue_flags)
}
}
+static inline bool io_sock_support_zc(struct socket *sock)
+{
+ return likely(sock->sk && sk_fullsock(sock->sk) &&
+ (sock->sk->sk_protocol == IPPROTO_TCP ||
+ sock->sk->sk_protocol == IPPROTO_UDP));
+}
+
static struct io_async_msghdr *io_msg_alloc_async(struct io_kiocb *req,
unsigned int issue_flags)
{
@@ -1056,6 +1063,8 @@ int io_send_zc(struct io_kiocb *req, unsigned int issue_flags)
sock = sock_from_file(req->file);
if (unlikely(!sock))
return -ENOTSOCK;
+ if (!io_sock_support_zc(sock))
+ return -EOPNOTSUPP;
msg.msg_name = NULL;
msg.msg_control = NULL;
--
2.38.0
^ permalink raw reply related [flat|nested] 10+ messages in thread
* [PATCH for-6.1 2/2] io_uring/net: fail zc sendmsg for unsupported protocols
2022-10-20 1:42 [PATCH for-6.1 0/2] don't fallback if sock doesn't undestand zc Pavel Begunkov
2022-10-20 1:42 ` [PATCH for-6.1 1/2] io_uring/net: fail zc send for unsupported protocols Pavel Begunkov
@ 2022-10-20 1:42 ` Pavel Begunkov
2022-10-20 2:26 ` [PATCH for-6.1 0/2] don't fallback if sock doesn't undestand zc Jens Axboe
2 siblings, 0 replies; 10+ messages in thread
From: Pavel Begunkov @ 2022-10-20 1:42 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: io-uring; +Cc: Jens Axboe, asml.silence, Stefan Metzmacher
The previous patch fails zerocopy send requests for protocols that don't
support it, do the same for zerocopy sendmsg.
Signed-off-by: Pavel Begunkov <[email protected]>
---
io_uring/net.c | 2 ++
1 file changed, 2 insertions(+)
diff --git a/io_uring/net.c b/io_uring/net.c
index 28127f1de1f0..735eec545115 100644
--- a/io_uring/net.c
+++ b/io_uring/net.c
@@ -1160,6 +1160,8 @@ int io_sendmsg_zc(struct io_kiocb *req, unsigned int issue_flags)
sock = sock_from_file(req->file);
if (unlikely(!sock))
return -ENOTSOCK;
+ if (!io_sock_support_zc(sock))
+ return -EOPNOTSUPP;
if (req_has_async_data(req)) {
kmsg = req->async_data;
--
2.38.0
^ permalink raw reply related [flat|nested] 10+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH for-6.1 0/2] don't fallback if sock doesn't undestand zc
2022-10-20 1:42 [PATCH for-6.1 0/2] don't fallback if sock doesn't undestand zc Pavel Begunkov
2022-10-20 1:42 ` [PATCH for-6.1 1/2] io_uring/net: fail zc send for unsupported protocols Pavel Begunkov
2022-10-20 1:42 ` [PATCH for-6.1 2/2] io_uring/net: fail zc sendmsg " Pavel Begunkov
@ 2022-10-20 2:26 ` Jens Axboe
2 siblings, 0 replies; 10+ messages in thread
From: Jens Axboe @ 2022-10-20 2:26 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: io-uring, Pavel Begunkov; +Cc: Stefan Metzmacher
On Thu, 20 Oct 2022 02:42:34 +0100, Pavel Begunkov wrote:
> Prefer failinig requests over copying when we're dealing with
> protocols that don't support io_uring zerocopy send. The patches
> are split to make backporting easier.
>
> Pavel Begunkov (2):
> io_uring/net: fail zc send for unsupported protocols
> io_uring/net: fail zc sendmsg for unsupported protocols
>
> [...]
Applied, thanks!
[1/2] io_uring/net: fail zc send for unsupported protocols
commit: cf6d01d79d3ea2274891c79cb51fa80dfde39acd
[2/2] io_uring/net: fail zc sendmsg for unsupported protocols
commit: 9f92d171efe73abc3d026ed9e21f08b482075782
Best regards,
--
Jens Axboe
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 10+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH for-6.1 1/2] io_uring/net: fail zc send for unsupported protocols
2022-10-20 1:42 ` [PATCH for-6.1 1/2] io_uring/net: fail zc send for unsupported protocols Pavel Begunkov
@ 2022-10-20 9:13 ` Stefan Metzmacher
2022-10-20 12:48 ` Pavel Begunkov
2022-10-20 12:49 ` Jens Axboe
0 siblings, 2 replies; 10+ messages in thread
From: Stefan Metzmacher @ 2022-10-20 9:13 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Pavel Begunkov, io-uring; +Cc: Jens Axboe, netdev
Hi Pavel,
> If a protocol doesn't support zerocopy it will silently fall back to
> copying. This type of behaviour has always been a source of troubles
> so it's better to fail such requests instead. For now explicitly
> whitelist supported protocols in io_uring, which should be turned later
> into a socket flag.
>
> Cc: <[email protected]> # 6.0
> Signed-off-by: Pavel Begunkov <[email protected]>
> ---
> io_uring/net.c | 9 +++++++++
> 1 file changed, 9 insertions(+)
>
> diff --git a/io_uring/net.c b/io_uring/net.c
> index 8c7226b5bf41..28127f1de1f0 100644
> --- a/io_uring/net.c
> +++ b/io_uring/net.c
> @@ -120,6 +120,13 @@ static void io_netmsg_recycle(struct io_kiocb *req, unsigned int issue_flags)
> }
> }
>
> +static inline bool io_sock_support_zc(struct socket *sock)
> +{
> + return likely(sock->sk && sk_fullsock(sock->sk) &&
> + (sock->sk->sk_protocol == IPPROTO_TCP ||
> + sock->sk->sk_protocol == IPPROTO_UDP));
> +}
Can we please make this more generic (at least for 6.1, which is likely be an lts release)
It means my out of tree smbdirect driver would not be able to provide SENDMSG_ZC.
Currently sk_setsockopt has this logic:
case SO_ZEROCOPY:
if (sk->sk_family == PF_INET || sk->sk_family == PF_INET6) {
if (!(sk_is_tcp(sk) ||
(sk->sk_type == SOCK_DGRAM &&
sk->sk_protocol == IPPROTO_UDP)))
ret = -EOPNOTSUPP;
} else if (sk->sk_family != PF_RDS) {
ret = -EOPNOTSUPP;
}
if (!ret) {
if (val < 0 || val > 1)
ret = -EINVAL;
else
sock_valbool_flag(sk, SOCK_ZEROCOPY, valbool);
}
break;
Maybe the socket creation code could set
unsigned char skc_so_zerocopy_supported:1;
and/or
unsigned char skc_zerocopy_msg_ubuf_supported:1;
In order to avoid the manual complex tests.
What do you think?
metze
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 10+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH for-6.1 1/2] io_uring/net: fail zc send for unsupported protocols
2022-10-20 9:13 ` Stefan Metzmacher
@ 2022-10-20 12:48 ` Pavel Begunkov
2022-10-20 13:05 ` Stefan Metzmacher
2022-10-20 12:49 ` Jens Axboe
1 sibling, 1 reply; 10+ messages in thread
From: Pavel Begunkov @ 2022-10-20 12:48 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Stefan Metzmacher, io-uring; +Cc: Jens Axboe, netdev
On 10/20/22 10:13, Stefan Metzmacher wrote:
> Hi Pavel,
>
>> If a protocol doesn't support zerocopy it will silently fall back to
>> copying. This type of behaviour has always been a source of troubles
>> so it's better to fail such requests instead. For now explicitly
>> whitelist supported protocols in io_uring, which should be turned later
>> into a socket flag.
>>
>> Cc: <[email protected]> # 6.0
>> Signed-off-by: Pavel Begunkov <[email protected]>
>> ---
>> io_uring/net.c | 9 +++++++++
>> 1 file changed, 9 insertions(+)
>>
>> diff --git a/io_uring/net.c b/io_uring/net.c
>> index 8c7226b5bf41..28127f1de1f0 100644
>> --- a/io_uring/net.c
>> +++ b/io_uring/net.c
>> @@ -120,6 +120,13 @@ static void io_netmsg_recycle(struct io_kiocb *req, unsigned int issue_flags)
>> }
>> }
>> +static inline bool io_sock_support_zc(struct socket *sock)
>> +{
>> + return likely(sock->sk && sk_fullsock(sock->sk) &&
>> + (sock->sk->sk_protocol == IPPROTO_TCP ||
>> + sock->sk->sk_protocol == IPPROTO_UDP));
>> +}
>
> Can we please make this more generic (at least for 6.1, which is likely be an lts release)
>
> It means my out of tree smbdirect driver would not be able to provide SENDMSG_ZC.
>
> Currently sk_setsockopt has this logic:
>
> case SO_ZEROCOPY:
> if (sk->sk_family == PF_INET || sk->sk_family == PF_INET6) {
> if (!(sk_is_tcp(sk) ||
> (sk->sk_type == SOCK_DGRAM &&
> sk->sk_protocol == IPPROTO_UDP)))
> ret = -EOPNOTSUPP;
> } else if (sk->sk_family != PF_RDS) {
> ret = -EOPNOTSUPP;
> }
> if (!ret) {
> if (val < 0 || val > 1)
> ret = -EINVAL;
> else
> sock_valbool_flag(sk, SOCK_ZEROCOPY, valbool);
> }
> break;
>
> Maybe the socket creation code could set
> unsigned char skc_so_zerocopy_supported:1;
> and/or
> unsigned char skc_zerocopy_msg_ubuf_supported:1;
>
> In order to avoid the manual complex tests.
>
> What do you think?
Ok, wanted to do it rather later but let me to try fiddle with it.
btw, what's happening with smbdirect? Do you plan upstream it one day
and it's just maturing out of tree?
--
Pavel Begunkov
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 10+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH for-6.1 1/2] io_uring/net: fail zc send for unsupported protocols
2022-10-20 9:13 ` Stefan Metzmacher
2022-10-20 12:48 ` Pavel Begunkov
@ 2022-10-20 12:49 ` Jens Axboe
2022-10-20 12:53 ` Pavel Begunkov
1 sibling, 1 reply; 10+ messages in thread
From: Jens Axboe @ 2022-10-20 12:49 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Stefan Metzmacher, Pavel Begunkov, io-uring; +Cc: netdev
On 10/20/22 2:13 AM, Stefan Metzmacher wrote:
> Hi Pavel,
>
>> If a protocol doesn't support zerocopy it will silently fall back to
>> copying. This type of behaviour has always been a source of troubles
>> so it's better to fail such requests instead. For now explicitly
>> whitelist supported protocols in io_uring, which should be turned later
>> into a socket flag.
>>
>> Cc: <[email protected]> # 6.0
>> Signed-off-by: Pavel Begunkov <[email protected]>
>> ---
>> io_uring/net.c | 9 +++++++++
>> 1 file changed, 9 insertions(+)
>>
>> diff --git a/io_uring/net.c b/io_uring/net.c
>> index 8c7226b5bf41..28127f1de1f0 100644
>> --- a/io_uring/net.c
>> +++ b/io_uring/net.c
>> @@ -120,6 +120,13 @@ static void io_netmsg_recycle(struct io_kiocb *req, unsigned int issue_flags)
>> }
>> }
>> +static inline bool io_sock_support_zc(struct socket *sock)
>> +{
>> + return likely(sock->sk && sk_fullsock(sock->sk) &&
>> + (sock->sk->sk_protocol == IPPROTO_TCP ||
>> + sock->sk->sk_protocol == IPPROTO_UDP));
>> +}
>
> Can we please make this more generic (at least for 6.1, which is likely be an lts release)
>
> It means my out of tree smbdirect driver would not be able to provide SENDMSG_ZC.
>
> Currently sk_setsockopt has this logic:
>
> case SO_ZEROCOPY:
> if (sk->sk_family == PF_INET || sk->sk_family == PF_INET6) {
> if (!(sk_is_tcp(sk) ||
> (sk->sk_type == SOCK_DGRAM &&
> sk->sk_protocol == IPPROTO_UDP)))
> ret = -EOPNOTSUPP;
> } else if (sk->sk_family != PF_RDS) {
> ret = -EOPNOTSUPP;
> }
> if (!ret) {
> if (val < 0 || val > 1)
> ret = -EINVAL;
> else
> sock_valbool_flag(sk, SOCK_ZEROCOPY, valbool);
> }
> break;
>
> Maybe the socket creation code could set
> unsigned char skc_so_zerocopy_supported:1;
> and/or
> unsigned char skc_zerocopy_msg_ubuf_supported:1;
>
> In order to avoid the manual complex tests.
I agree that would be cleaner, even for 6.1. Let's drop these two
for now.
--
Jens Axboe
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 10+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH for-6.1 1/2] io_uring/net: fail zc send for unsupported protocols
2022-10-20 12:49 ` Jens Axboe
@ 2022-10-20 12:53 ` Pavel Begunkov
2022-10-20 12:59 ` Jens Axboe
0 siblings, 1 reply; 10+ messages in thread
From: Pavel Begunkov @ 2022-10-20 12:53 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Jens Axboe, Stefan Metzmacher, io-uring; +Cc: netdev
On 10/20/22 13:49, Jens Axboe wrote:
> On 10/20/22 2:13 AM, Stefan Metzmacher wrote:
>> Hi Pavel,
>>
>>> If a protocol doesn't support zerocopy it will silently fall back to
>>> copying. This type of behaviour has always been a source of troubles
>>> so it's better to fail such requests instead. For now explicitly
>>> whitelist supported protocols in io_uring, which should be turned later
>>> into a socket flag.
>>>
>>> Cc: <[email protected]> # 6.0
>>> Signed-off-by: Pavel Begunkov <[email protected]>
>>> ---
>>> io_uring/net.c | 9 +++++++++
>>> 1 file changed, 9 insertions(+)
>>>
>>> diff --git a/io_uring/net.c b/io_uring/net.c
>>> index 8c7226b5bf41..28127f1de1f0 100644
>>> --- a/io_uring/net.c
>>> +++ b/io_uring/net.c
>>> @@ -120,6 +120,13 @@ static void io_netmsg_recycle(struct io_kiocb *req, unsigned int issue_flags)
>>> }
>>> }
>>> +static inline bool io_sock_support_zc(struct socket *sock)
>>> +{
>>> + return likely(sock->sk && sk_fullsock(sock->sk) &&
>>> + (sock->sk->sk_protocol == IPPROTO_TCP ||
>>> + sock->sk->sk_protocol == IPPROTO_UDP));
>>> +}
>>
>> Can we please make this more generic (at least for 6.1, which is likely be an lts release)
>>
>> It means my out of tree smbdirect driver would not be able to provide SENDMSG_ZC.
>>
>> Currently sk_setsockopt has this logic:
>>
>> case SO_ZEROCOPY:
>> if (sk->sk_family == PF_INET || sk->sk_family == PF_INET6) {
>> if (!(sk_is_tcp(sk) ||
>> (sk->sk_type == SOCK_DGRAM &&
>> sk->sk_protocol == IPPROTO_UDP)))
>> ret = -EOPNOTSUPP;
>> } else if (sk->sk_family != PF_RDS) {
>> ret = -EOPNOTSUPP;
>> }
>> if (!ret) {
>> if (val < 0 || val > 1)
>> ret = -EINVAL;
>> else
>> sock_valbool_flag(sk, SOCK_ZEROCOPY, valbool);
>> }
>> break;
>>
>> Maybe the socket creation code could set
>> unsigned char skc_so_zerocopy_supported:1;
>> and/or
>> unsigned char skc_zerocopy_msg_ubuf_supported:1;
>>
>> In order to avoid the manual complex tests.
>
> I agree that would be cleaner, even for 6.1. Let's drop these two
> for now.
As I mentioned let's drop, but if not for smb I do think it's
better as doesn't require changes in multiple /net files.
--
Pavel Begunkov
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 10+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH for-6.1 1/2] io_uring/net: fail zc send for unsupported protocols
2022-10-20 12:53 ` Pavel Begunkov
@ 2022-10-20 12:59 ` Jens Axboe
0 siblings, 0 replies; 10+ messages in thread
From: Jens Axboe @ 2022-10-20 12:59 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Pavel Begunkov, Stefan Metzmacher, io-uring; +Cc: netdev
On 10/20/22 5:53 AM, Pavel Begunkov wrote:
> On 10/20/22 13:49, Jens Axboe wrote:
>> On 10/20/22 2:13 AM, Stefan Metzmacher wrote:
>>> Hi Pavel,
>>>
>>>> If a protocol doesn't support zerocopy it will silently fall back to
>>>> copying. This type of behaviour has always been a source of troubles
>>>> so it's better to fail such requests instead. For now explicitly
>>>> whitelist supported protocols in io_uring, which should be turned later
>>>> into a socket flag.
>>>>
>>>> Cc: <[email protected]> # 6.0
>>>> Signed-off-by: Pavel Begunkov <[email protected]>
>>>> ---
>>>> ?? io_uring/net.c | 9 +++++++++
>>>> ?? 1 file changed, 9 insertions(+)
>>>>
>>>> diff --git a/io_uring/net.c b/io_uring/net.c
>>>> index 8c7226b5bf41..28127f1de1f0 100644
>>>> --- a/io_uring/net.c
>>>> +++ b/io_uring/net.c
>>>> @@ -120,6 +120,13 @@ static void io_netmsg_recycle(struct io_kiocb *req, unsigned int issue_flags)
>>>> ?????? }
>>>> ?? }
>>>> ?? +static inline bool io_sock_support_zc(struct socket *sock)
>>>> +{
>>>> +??? return likely(sock->sk && sk_fullsock(sock->sk) &&
>>>> +???????????? (sock->sk->sk_protocol == IPPROTO_TCP ||
>>>> +????????????? sock->sk->sk_protocol == IPPROTO_UDP));
>>>> +}
>>>
>>> Can we please make this more generic (at least for 6.1, which is likely be an lts release)
>>>
>>> It means my out of tree smbdirect driver would not be able to provide SENDMSG_ZC.
>>>
>>> Currently sk_setsockopt has this logic:
>>>
>>> ???????? case SO_ZEROCOPY:
>>> ???????????????? if (sk->sk_family == PF_INET || sk->sk_family == PF_INET6) {
>>> ???????????????????????? if (!(sk_is_tcp(sk) ||
>>> ?????????????????????????????? (sk->sk_type == SOCK_DGRAM &&
>>> ??????????????????????????????? sk->sk_protocol == IPPROTO_UDP)))
>>> ???????????????????????????????? ret = -EOPNOTSUPP;
>>> ???????????????? } else if (sk->sk_family != PF_RDS) {
>>> ???????????????????????? ret = -EOPNOTSUPP;
>>> ???????????????? }
>>> ???????????????? if (!ret) {
>>> ???????????????????????? if (val < 0 || val > 1)
>>> ???????????????????????????????? ret = -EINVAL;
>>> ???????????????????????? else
>>> ???????????????????????????????? sock_valbool_flag(sk, SOCK_ZEROCOPY, valbool);
>>> ???????????????? }
>>> ???????????????? break;
>>>
>>> Maybe the socket creation code could set
>>> unsigned char skc_so_zerocopy_supported:1;
>>> and/or
>>> unsigned char skc_zerocopy_msg_ubuf_supported:1;
>>>
>>> In order to avoid the manual complex tests.
>>
>> I agree that would be cleaner, even for 6.1. Let's drop these two
>> for now.
>
> As I mentioned let's drop, but if not for smb I do think it's
> better as doesn't require changes in multiple /net files.
I do think it's cleaner to do as a socket flag rather than hardcode it
in the caller (and potentially making bad assumptions, even if the
out-of-tree code is a bit of a reach for sure).
--
Jens Axboe
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 10+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH for-6.1 1/2] io_uring/net: fail zc send for unsupported protocols
2022-10-20 12:48 ` Pavel Begunkov
@ 2022-10-20 13:05 ` Stefan Metzmacher
0 siblings, 0 replies; 10+ messages in thread
From: Stefan Metzmacher @ 2022-10-20 13:05 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Pavel Begunkov, io-uring; +Cc: Jens Axboe, netdev
Hi Pavel,
>> Maybe the socket creation code could set
>> unsigned char skc_so_zerocopy_supported:1;
>> and/or
>> unsigned char skc_zerocopy_msg_ubuf_supported:1;
>>
>> In order to avoid the manual complex tests.
>>
>> What do you think?
>
> Ok, wanted to do it rather later but let me to try fiddle with it.
Thanks!
> btw, what's happening with smbdirect? Do you plan upstream it one day
> and it's just maturing out of tree?
Yes, once its stable and useful. My current plan (as time permits) is
this:
1. get the samba_io_uring_ev tevent backend working (with current kernels),
see my other recent mail on that.
2. add OP_SENDMSG[_ZC]/OP_RECVMSG and OP_SPLICE support for the file server
part of Samba ready (based on 1.)
3. try to get a stripped down version of the smbdirect module ready to be used
in cifs.ko (without exporting smbdirect sockets to userspace) upstream
4. extend the smbdirect module to be able to be used by ksmbd upstreamed
5. get the uapi for MSG_OOB and msg_control stable for samba's client and server
into a useful state and then export AF_SMBDIRECT exported to userspace
I hope to get 1 and 2 ready in the next weeks...
metze
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 10+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2022-10-20 13:05 UTC | newest]
Thread overview: 10+ messages (download: mbox.gz follow: Atom feed
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2022-10-20 1:42 [PATCH for-6.1 0/2] don't fallback if sock doesn't undestand zc Pavel Begunkov
2022-10-20 1:42 ` [PATCH for-6.1 1/2] io_uring/net: fail zc send for unsupported protocols Pavel Begunkov
2022-10-20 9:13 ` Stefan Metzmacher
2022-10-20 12:48 ` Pavel Begunkov
2022-10-20 13:05 ` Stefan Metzmacher
2022-10-20 12:49 ` Jens Axboe
2022-10-20 12:53 ` Pavel Begunkov
2022-10-20 12:59 ` Jens Axboe
2022-10-20 1:42 ` [PATCH for-6.1 2/2] io_uring/net: fail zc sendmsg " Pavel Begunkov
2022-10-20 2:26 ` [PATCH for-6.1 0/2] don't fallback if sock doesn't undestand zc Jens Axboe
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox