From: Stefan Roesch <[email protected]>
To: Andreas Dilger <[email protected]>, Clay Harris <[email protected]>
Cc: <[email protected]>,
linux-fsdevel <[email protected]>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v1 0/5] io_uring: add xattr support
Date: Tue, 30 Nov 2021 22:16:52 -0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <[email protected]> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <[email protected]>
On 11/29/21 7:16 PM, Andreas Dilger wrote:
>
>> On Nov 29, 2021, at 6:08 PM, Clay Harris <[email protected]> wrote:
>>
>> On Mon, Nov 29 2021 at 14:12:52 -0800, Stefan Roesch quoth thus:
>>
>>> This adds the xattr support to io_uring. The intent is to have a more
>>> complete support for file operations in io_uring.
>>>
>>> This change adds support for the following functions to io_uring:
>>> - fgetxattr
>>> - fsetxattr
>>> - getxattr
>>> - setxattr
>>
>> You may wish to consider the following.
>>
>> Patching for these functions makes for an excellent opportunity
>> to provide a better interface. Rather than implement fXetattr
>> at all, you could enable io_uring to use functions like:
>>
>> int Xetxattr(int dfd, const char *path, const char *name,
>> [const] void *value, size_t size, int flags);
>
> This would naturally be named "...xattrat()"?
>
>> Not only does this simplify the io_uring interface down to two
>> functions, but modernizes and fixes a deficit in usability.
>> In terms of io_uring, this is just changing internal interfaces.
>
> Even better would be the ability to get/set an array of xattrs in
> one call, to avoid repeated path lookups in the common case of
> handling multiple xattrs on a single file.
>
You are proposing a new API. However that API has its challenges:
- How do you implement error handling? What if only some requests fail.
- It will make the code considerably more complicated (for user-space
as well as kernel)
Instead the user can do the following:
- io_uring already has support for the following:
- io_uring already has the ability to prepare several SQE's at once
- These SQE's can be submitted in one operation
- The SQE's can also be linked and waited for as a unit.
- Allows to map each individual CQE to its request.
>> Although unnecessary for io_uring, it would be nice to at least
>> consider what parts of this code could be leveraged for future
>> Xetxattr2 syscalls.
>
>>
>>> Patch 1: fs: make user_path_at_empty() take a struct filename
>>> The user_path_at_empty filename parameter has been changed
>>> from a const char user pointer to a filename struct. io_uring
>>> operates on filenames.
>>> In addition also the functions that call user_path_at_empty
>>> in namei.c and stat.c have been modified for this change.
>>>
>>> Patch 2: fs: split off setxattr_setup function from setxattr
>>> Split off the setup part of the setxattr function
>>>
>>> Patch 3: fs: split off the vfs_getxattr from getxattr
>>> Split of the vfs_getxattr part from getxattr. This will
>>> allow to invoke it from io_uring.
>>>
>>> Patch 4: io_uring: add fsetxattr and setxattr support
>>> This adds new functions to support the fsetxattr and setxattr
>>> functions.
>>>
>>> Patch 5: io_uring: add fgetxattr and getxattr support
>>> This adds new functions to support the fgetxattr and getxattr
>>> functions.
>>>
>>>
>>> There are two additional patches:
>>> liburing: Add support for xattr api's.
>>> This also includes the tests for the new code.
>>> xfstests: Add support for io_uring xattr support.
>>>
>>>
>>> Stefan Roesch (5):
>>> fs: make user_path_at_empty() take a struct filename
>>> fs: split off setxattr_setup function from setxattr
>>> fs: split off the vfs_getxattr from getxattr
>>> io_uring: add fsetxattr and setxattr support
>>> io_uring: add fgetxattr and getxattr support
>>>
>>> fs/internal.h | 23 +++
>>> fs/io_uring.c | 325 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>>> fs/namei.c | 5 +-
>>> fs/stat.c | 7 +-
>>> fs/xattr.c | 114 +++++++-----
>>> include/linux/namei.h | 4 +-
>>> include/uapi/linux/io_uring.h | 8 +-
>>> 7 files changed, 439 insertions(+), 47 deletions(-)
>>>
>>>
>>> Signed-off-by: Stefan Roesch <[email protected]>
>>> base-commit: c2626d30f312afc341158e07bf088f5a23b4eeeb
>>> --
>>> 2.30.2
>
>
> Cheers, Andreas
>
>
>
>
>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2021-12-01 6:17 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 21+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2021-11-29 22:12 [PATCH v1 0/5] io_uring: add xattr support Stefan Roesch
2021-11-29 22:12 ` [PATCH v1 1/5] fs: make user_path_at_empty() take a struct filename Stefan Roesch
2021-11-30 2:09 ` kernel test robot
2021-11-29 22:12 ` [PATCH v1 2/5] fs: split off setxattr_setup function from setxattr Stefan Roesch
2021-11-29 22:12 ` [PATCH v1 3/5] fs: split off the vfs_getxattr from getxattr Stefan Roesch
2021-11-29 22:12 ` [PATCH v1 4/5] io_uring: add fsetxattr and setxattr support Stefan Roesch
2021-11-29 22:12 ` [PATCH v1 5/5] io_uring: add fgetxattr and getxattr support Stefan Roesch
2021-11-30 1:08 ` [PATCH v1 0/5] io_uring: add xattr support Clay Harris
2021-11-30 3:16 ` Andreas Dilger
2021-11-30 6:37 ` Clay Harris
2021-11-30 6:53 ` Clay Harris
2021-11-30 11:40 ` Clay Harris
2021-11-30 7:19 ` Dave Chinner
2021-12-01 6:16 ` Stefan Roesch [this message]
2021-12-01 6:07 ` Stefan Roesch
2021-12-01 7:46 ` Clay Harris
2021-12-01 13:14 ` Christian Brauner
2021-12-01 12:19 ` Stefan Metzmacher
2021-12-01 19:52 ` Clay Harris
2021-12-01 20:05 ` Andreas Dilger
2021-12-03 17:58 ` Stefan Roesch
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] \
/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