Re: [PATCH 0/5] random io-wq and io_uring bits

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

 



On 2/28/20 12:36 AM, Pavel Begunkov wrote:
> A bunch of unconnected patches, easy and straightworward.
> Probably could even be picked separately.
> 
> The only thing could be of concern is [PATCH 4/5]. I assumed that
> work setup is short (switch creds, mm, fs, files with task_[un]lock),
> and arm a timeout after it's done.

That's totally fine in terms of timing, the reason it was done in a
callback was so we didn't have a small gap where a cancellation
would trigger via the timeout, but the request wasn't locatable yet.

But you retain that, so I think it should be fine.

-- 
Jens Axboe




[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