On Feb 2, 2024, at 10:41 AM, Olivier Langlois <olivier@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> On Fri, 2024-02-02 at 09:42 -0700, Jens Axboe wrote:
>>> On 2/2/24 9:41 AM, Olivier Langlois wrote:
>>> On Tue, 2023-04-25 at 11:20 -0700, Stefan Roesch wrote:
>>>> +
>>>> +int io_uring_register_napi(struct io_uring *ring, struct
>>>> io_uring_napi *napi)
>>>> +{
>>>> + return __sys_io_uring_register(ring->ring_fd,
>>>> + IORING_REGISTER_NAPI, napi, 0);
>>>> +}
>>>> +
>>>> +int io_uring_unregister_napi(struct io_uring *ring, struct
>>>> io_uring_napi *napi)
>>>> +{
>>>> + return __sys_io_uring_register(ring->ring_fd,
>>>> + IORING_UNREGISTER_NAPI, napi,
>>>> 0);
>>>> +}
>>>
>>> my apologies if this is not the latest version of the patch but I
>>> think
>>> that it is...
>>>
>>> nr_args should be 1 to match what __io_uring_register() in the
>>> current
>>> corresponding kernel patch expects:
>>>
>>> https://git.kernel.dk/cgit/linux/commit/?h=io_uring-napi&id=787d81d3132aaf4eb4a4a5f24ff949e350e537d0
>>
>> Can you send a patch I can fold in?
>>
> Jens,
>
> I am unsure of what you are asking me.
>
> You would like me to send a patch to fix a liburing patch that has
> never been applied AFAIK?
>
> if the v9 patch has never been applied. Wouldn't just editing Stefan
> patch by replacing the nr_args param from 0 to 1 directly do it?
The current version is what is in that branch you referenced. If you see anything in there that needs changing, send a patch for that.
I can send out the series again if needed.
—
Jens Axboe
