On Wed, Jan 18, 2023 at 10:11:45PM +0000, Al Viro wrote: > On Mon, Jan 16, 2023 at 11:52:43PM -0800, Christoph Hellwig wrote: > > > This doesn't remove the existing setting of IOCB_WRITE, and also > > feelds like the wrong place. > > > > I suspect the best is to: > > > > - rename init_sync_kiocb to init_kiocb > > - pass a new argument for the destination to it. I'm not entirely > > sure if flags is a good thing, or an explicit READ/WRITE might be > > better because it's harder to get wrong, even if a the compiler > > might generate worth code for it. > > - also use it in the async callers (io_uring, aio, overlayfs, loop, > > nvmet, target, cachefs, file backed swap) > > Do you want it to mess with get_current_ioprio() for those? Looks > wrong... We want to be consistent for sync vs async submission. So I think yes, we want to do the get_current_ioprio for most of them, exceptions beeing aio and io_uring - those could use a __init_iocb or init_iocb_ioprio variant that passs in the explicit priority if we want to avoid the call if it would be overriden later.
