[PATCH for-next 06/10] io_uring: explain io_wq_work::cancel_seq placement

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

 



Add a comment on why we keep ->cancel_seq in struct io_wq_work instead
of struct io_kiocb despite it needed only by io_uring but not io-wq.

Signed-off-by: Pavel Begunkov <asml.silence@xxxxxxxxx>
---
 io_uring/io-wq.h | 1 +
 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+)

diff --git a/io_uring/io-wq.h b/io_uring/io-wq.h
index ba6eee76d028..3f54ee2a8eeb 100644
--- a/io_uring/io-wq.h
+++ b/io_uring/io-wq.h
@@ -155,6 +155,7 @@ struct io_wq_work_node *wq_stack_extract(struct io_wq_work_node *stack)
 struct io_wq_work {
 	struct io_wq_work_node list;
 	unsigned flags;
+	/* place it here instead of io_kiocb as it fills padding and saves 4B */
 	int cancel_seq;
 };
 
-- 
2.36.1




[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