On 6/22/21 11:49 PM, Dmitry Kadashev wrote: > On Wed, Jun 23, 2021 at 12:32 AM Jens Axboe <axboe@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: >> >> On 6/22/21 11:28 AM, Pavel Begunkov wrote: >>> On 6/22/21 6:26 PM, Jens Axboe wrote: >>>> On 6/22/21 5:56 AM, Pavel Begunkov wrote: >>>>> On 6/3/21 6:18 AM, Dmitry Kadashev wrote: >>>>>> This started out as an attempt to add mkdirat support to io_uring which >>>>>> is heavily based on renameat() / unlinkat() support. >>>>>> >>>>>> During the review process more operations were added (linkat, symlinkat, >>>>>> mknodat) mainly to keep things uniform internally (in namei.c), and >>>>>> with things changed in namei.c adding support for these operations to >>>>>> io_uring is trivial, so that was done too. See >>>>>> https://lore.kernel.org/io-uring/20210514145259.wtl4xcsp52woi6ab@wittgenstein/ >>>>> >>>>> io_uring part looks good in general, just small comments. However, I >>>>> believe we should respin it, because there should be build problems >>>>> in the middle. >>>> >>>> I can drop it, if Dmitry wants to respin. I do think that we could >>>> easily drop mknodat and not really lose anything there, better to >>>> reserve the op for something a bit more useful. >>> >>> I can try it and send a fold in, if you want. >>> Other changes may be on top >> >> Sure that works too, will rebase in any case, and I'd like to add >> Christian's ack as well. I'll just re-apply with the fold-ins. > > Jens, it seems that during this rebase you've accidentally squashed the > "fs: update do_*() helpers to return ints" and > "io_uring: add support for IORING_OP_SYMLINKAT" commits, so there is only the > former one in your tree, but it actually adds the SYMLINKAT opcode to io uring > (in addition to changing the helpers return types). Man, I wonder what happened there. I'll just drop the series, so when you resend this one (hopefully soon if it's for 5.14...), just make it against the current branch. -- Jens Axboe
