Hi Stefan, > On 11/29/21 5:08 PM, Clay Harris 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); >> >> 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. >> >> 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. > > Clay, > > while we can reduce the number of calls to 2, providing 4 calls will > ease the adoption of the interface. > > If you look at the userspace interface in liburing, you can see the > following function signature: > > static inline void io_uring_prep_fgetxattr(struct io_uring_sqe *sqe, > int fd, > const char *name, > const char *value, > size_t len) > > This is very similar to what you proposed. What's with lsetxattr and lgetxattr, why are they missing. I'd assume that even 6 helper functions in liburing would be able to use just 2 low level iouring opcodes. *listxattr is also missing, are there plans for them? metze
