[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <19b394560ad8aea4d7154f8022c5804421e27ca3.camel@fb.com>
Date: Mon, 21 Feb 2022 17:48:40 +0000
From: Dylan Yudaken <dylany@...com>
To: "axboe@...nel.dk" <axboe@...nel.dk>,
"asml.silence@...il.com" <asml.silence@...il.com>,
"io-uring@...r.kernel.org" <io-uring@...r.kernel.org>
CC: Kernel Team <Kernel-team@...com>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 0/4] io_uring: consistent behaviour with linked
read/write
On Mon, 2022-02-21 at 09:33 -0700, Jens Axboe wrote:
> On 2/21/22 7:16 AM, Dylan Yudaken wrote:
> > Currently submitting multiple read/write for one file with offset =
> > -1 will
> > not behave as if calling read(2)/write(2) multiple times. The
> > offset may be
> > pinned to the same value for each submission (for example if they
> > are
> > punted to the async worker) and so each read/write will have the
> > same
> > offset.
> >
> > This patch series fixes this.
> >
> > Patch 1,3 cleans up the code a bit
> >
> > Patch 2 grabs the file position at execution time, rather than when
> > the job
> > is queued to be run which fixes inconsistincies when jobs are run
> > asynchronously.
> >
> > Patch 4 increments the file's f_pos when reading it, which fixes
> > inconsistincies with concurrent runs.
> >
> > A test for this will be submitted to liburing separately.
>
> Looks good to me, but the patch 2 change will bubble through to patch
> 3
> and 4 as well. Care to respin a v3?
>
Yes sure - will do it combined with the test v3
Powered by blists - more mailing lists