Re: [RFC] what to do with IOCB_DSYNC?

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

 



On Sun, May 22, 2022 at 11:23:43AM +0100, Matthew Wilcox wrote:
> On Sun, May 22, 2022 at 09:45:09AM +0200, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> > On Sat, May 21, 2022 at 04:14:07PM -0600, Jens Axboe wrote:
> > > Then we're almost on par, and it looks like we just need to special case
> > > iov_iter_advance() for the nr_segs == 1 as well to be on par. This is on
> > > top of your patch as well, fwiw.
> > > 
> > > It might make sense to special case the single segment cases, for both
> > > setup, iteration, and advancing. With that, I think we'll be where we
> > > want to be, and there will be no discernable difference between the iter
> > > paths and the old style paths.
> > 
> > A while ago willy posted patches to support a new ITER type for direct
> > userspace pointer without iov.  It might be worth looking through the
> > archives and test that.
> 
> https://lore.kernel.org/linux-fsdevel/Yba+YSF6mkM%2FGYlK@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx/

	Direct kernel pointer, surely?  And from a quick look,
iov_iter_is_kaddr() checks for the wrong value...



[Index of Archives]     [Linux Ext4 Filesystem]     [Union Filesystem]     [Filesystem Testing]     [Ceph Users]     [Ecryptfs]     [NTFS 3]     [AutoFS]     [Kernel Newbies]     [Share Photos]     [Security]     [Netfilter]     [Bugtraq]     [Yosemite News]     [MIPS Linux]     [ARM Linux]     [Linux Security]     [Linux Cachefs]     [Reiser Filesystem]     [Linux RAID]     [NTFS 3]     [Samba]     [Device Mapper]     [CEPH Development]

  Powered by Linux