> And maybe the current way of doing things isn't the best way. But it > would be nice if we didn't completely give up on the functionality of > aio_cancel. I sympathize, but the reality is that the current infrastructure is very bad and no one is using it. It's not like we're getting rid of the syscall. I'll be behaving exactly as it does today: returning the error code that indicates that cancellation failed because it lost the race with completion. Every caller has to cope with that to use cancel safely. So if someone eventually implements iocb cancel safely we'll be able to plumb it back under the aio syscalls. But until that day I see no reason to carry around buggy infrastructure that is only slowing down the fast path. - z -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-bcache" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
