Re: [PATCH 2/4] io_uring/cmd: Introduce SOCKET_URING_OP_GETSOCKOPT

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



On 7/25/23 10:02 AM, Stanislav Fomichev wrote:
On 07/25, Breno Leitao wrote:
On Mon, Jul 24, 2023 at 10:31:28AM -0700, Stanislav Fomichev wrote:
On 07/24, Breno Leitao wrote:
Add support for getsockopt command (SOCKET_URING_OP_GETSOCKOPT), where
level is SOL_SOCKET. This is leveraging the sockptr_t infrastructure,
where a sockptr_t is either userspace or kernel space, and handled as
such.

Function io_uring_cmd_getsockopt() is inspired by __sys_getsockopt().

We probably need to also have bpf bits in the new
io_uring_cmd_getsockopt?

I also think this inconsistency behavior should be avoided.


It might be interesting to have the BPF hook for this function as
well, but I would like to do it in a following patch, so, I can
experiment with it better, if that is OK.

We are not using io_uring, so fine with me. However, having a way to bypass
get/setsockopt bpf might be problematic for some other heavy io_uring
users.

Lemme CC a bunch of Meta folks explicitly. I'm not sure what that state
of bpf support in io_uring.

We have use cases on the "cgroup/{g,s}etsockopt". It will be a surprise when the user moves from the syscall {g,s}etsockopt to SOCKET_URING_OP_*SOCKOPT and figured that the bpf handling is skipped.





[Index of Archives]     [Linux Samsung SoC]     [Linux Rockchip SoC]     [Linux Actions SoC]     [Linux for Synopsys ARC Processors]     [Linux NFS]     [Linux NILFS]     [Linux USB Devel]     [Video for Linux]     [Linux Audio Users]     [Yosemite News]     [Linux Kernel]     [Linux SCSI]


  Powered by Linux