linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v2] io-wq: expose IO_WQ_ACCT

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:   Mon, 13 Sep 2021 17:52:43 +0200
From:   Eugene Syromiatnikov <esyr@...hat.com>
To:     Jens Axboe <axboe@...nel.dk>
Cc:     Pavel Begunkov <asml.silence@...il.com>, io-uring@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, "Dmitry V. Levin" <ldv@...ace.io>,
        linux-api@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] io-wq: expose IO_WQ_ACCT_* enumeration items to UAPI

On Mon, Sep 13, 2021 at 07:28:11AM -0600, Jens Axboe wrote:
> This is really the same thing as before, just the names have changed.
> What I suggested was keeping the enum in io_uring, then just adding
> 
> enum {
> 	IO_WQ_BOUND,
> 	IO_WQ_UNBOUND,
> };
> 
> to uapi header. The ACCT stuff is io-wq specific too, that kind of naming
> shouldn't be propagated to userspace.

My apologies, I've overlooked the fact that the proposed names
are different.  Updated and resent[1].

[1] https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/20210913154415.GA12890@asgard.redhat.com/

> A BUILD_BUG_ON() could be added for them being different, but honestly
> I don't think that's worth it.