[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Date: Tue, 7 Jul 2020 17:00:14 +0100
From: Christoph Hellwig <hch@...radead.org>
To: Matthew Wilcox <willy@...radead.org>
Cc: Kanchan Joshi <joshi.k@...sung.com>, Jens Axboe <axboe@...nel.dk>,
viro@...iv.linux.org.uk, bcrl@...ck.org, hch@...radead.org,
Damien.LeMoal@....com, asml.silence@...il.com,
linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org, mb@...htnvm.io,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-aio@...ck.org,
io-uring@...r.kernel.org, linux-block@...r.kernel.org,
Selvakumar S <selvakuma.s1@...sung.com>,
Nitesh Shetty <nj.shetty@...sung.com>,
Javier Gonzalez <javier.gonz@...sung.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 4/4] io_uring: add support for zone-append
On Tue, Jul 07, 2020 at 04:52:37PM +0100, Matthew Wilcox wrote:
> But userspace has to _do_ something with that information anyway. So
> it must already have somewhere to put that information.
>
> I do think that interpretation of that field should be a separate flag
> from WRITE_APPEND so apps which genuinely don't care about where the I/O
> ended up don't have to allocate some temporary storage. eg a logging
> application which just needs to know that it managed to append to the
> end of the log and doesn't need to do anything if it's successful.
I agree with the concept of a flag for just returning the write
location. Because if you don't need that O_APPEND is all you need
anyway.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists