[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20180329085305.GA22215@lst.de>
Date: Thu, 29 Mar 2018 10:53:05 +0200
From: Christoph Hellwig <hch@....de>
To: Al Viro <viro@...IV.linux.org.uk>
Cc: Christoph Hellwig <hch@....de>, Avi Kivity <avi@...lladb.com>,
linux-aio@...ck.org, linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org,
netdev@...r.kernel.org, linux-api@...r.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 07/30] aio: add delayed cancel support
On Wed, Mar 28, 2018 at 05:35:26PM +0100, Al Viro wrote:
> > ret = vfs_fsync(req->file, req->datasync);
> > - fput(req->file);
> > - aio_complete(container_of(req, struct aio_kiocb, fsync), ret, 0);
> > + if (aio_complete(iocb, ret, 0, 0))
> > + fput(file);
>
> IDGI.
> 1) can aio_complete() ever return false here?
It won't. But sometimes checking the return value and sometimes not
seems like a bad pattern.
> 2) do we ever have aio_kiocb that would not have an associated
> struct file * that needs to be dropped on successful aio_complete()? AFAICS,
> rw, fsync and poll variants all have one, and I'm not sure what kind of
> async IO *could* be done without an opened file.
All have a file assoiated at least right now. As mentioned last time
finding a struct to pass that file would be rather annoying, so we'd either
have to pass it explicitly, or do something nasty like duplicating the
pointer in the aio_kiocb in addition to struct kiocb. Which might not
be that bad after all, as it would only bloat the aio_kiocb and not
struct kiocb used on stack all over.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists