[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20200618082921.zyc37cod2uhabd4e@mpHalley.local>
Date: Thu, 18 Jun 2020 10:29:21 +0200
From: "Javier González" <javier@...igon.com>
To: Christoph Hellwig <hch@...radead.org>
Cc: Kanchan Joshi <joshi.k@...sung.com>, axboe@...nel.dk,
viro@...iv.linux.org.uk, bcrl@...ck.org,
linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
linux-aio@...ck.org, io-uring@...r.kernel.org,
linux-block@...r.kernel.org, selvakuma.s1@...sung.com,
nj.shetty@...sung.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/3] zone-append support in aio and io-uring
On 17.06.2020 23:56, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
>On Wed, Jun 17, 2020 at 10:53:36PM +0530, Kanchan Joshi wrote:
>> This patchset enables issuing zone-append using aio and io-uring direct-io interface.
>>
>> For aio, this introduces opcode IOCB_CMD_ZONE_APPEND. Application uses start LBA
>> of the zone to issue append. On completion 'res2' field is used to return
>> zone-relative offset.
>>
>> For io-uring, this introduces three opcodes: IORING_OP_ZONE_APPEND/APPENDV/APPENDV_FIXED.
>> Since io_uring does not have aio-like res2, cqe->flags are repurposed to return zone-relative offset
>
>And what exactly are the semantics supposed to be? Remember the
>unix file abstractions does not know about zones at all.
>
>I really don't think squeezing low-level not quite block storage
>protocol details into the Linux read/write path is a good idea.
>
>What could be a useful addition is a way for O_APPEND/RWF_APPEND writes
>to report where they actually wrote, as that comes close to Zone Append
>while still making sense at our usual abstraction level for file I/O.
Makes sense. We will look into this for a V2.
Thanks,
Javier
Powered by blists - more mailing lists