Re: [PATCH v9 06/11] io_uring: introduce attributes for read/write and PI support

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

 



On 11/15/24 10:12 AM, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> On Fri, Nov 15, 2024 at 04:40:58PM +0000, Pavel Begunkov wrote:
>>> So?  If we have a strong enough requirement for something else we
>>> can triviall add another opcode.  Maybe we should just add different
>>> opcodes for read/write with metadata so that folks don't freak out
>>> about this?
>>
>> IMHO, PI is not so special to have a special opcode for it unlike
>> some more generic read/write with meta / attributes, but that one
>> would have same questions.
> 
> Well, apparently is one the hand hand not general enough that you
> don't want to give it SQE128 space, but you also don't want to give
> it an opcode.
> 
> Maybe we just need make it uring_cmd to get out of these conflicting
> requirements.

Let's please lay off the hyperbole here, uring_cmd would be a terrible
way to do this. We're working through the flags requirements. Obviously
this is now missing 6.13, but there's no reason why it's not on track to
make 6.14 in a saner way.

-- 
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