On 1/30/20 9:29 AM, Glauber Costa wrote: > On Thu, Jan 30, 2020 at 11:13 AM Jens Axboe <axboe@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: >> >> On 1/30/20 9:00 AM, Glauber Costa wrote: >>> It is common for an application using an ever-evolving interface to want >>> to inquire about the presence of certain functionality it plans to use. >>> >>> Information about opcodes is stored in a io_uring_probe structure. There >>> is usually some boilerplate involved in initializing one, and then using >>> it to check if it is enabled. >>> >>> This patch adds two new helper functions: one that returns a pointer to >>> a io_uring_probe (or null if it probe is not available), and another one >>> that given a probe checks if the opcode is supported. >> >> This looks good, I committed it with minor changes. >> >> On top of this, we should have a helper that doesn't need a ring. So >> basically one that just sets up a ring, calls io_uring_get_probe(), >> then tears down the ring. >> > I'd be happy to follow up with that. > > Just to be sure, the information returned by probe should be able to outlive the > tear down of the ring, right ? Yeah, same lifetime as the helper you have now, caller must free it once done. -- Jens Axboe
