[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <2023062208-animosity-squabble-c1ba@gregkh>
Date: Thu, 22 Jun 2023 18:10:00 +0200
From: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>
To: Breno Leitao <leitao@...ian.org>
Cc: Jonathan Corbet <corbet@....net>, Jens Axboe <axboe@...nel.dk>,
Pavel Begunkov <asml.silence@...il.com>,
"David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
Eric Dumazet <edumazet@...gle.com>,
Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>,
Paolo Abeni <pabeni@...hat.com>, leit@...a.com,
Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>,
Steve French <stfrench@...rosoft.com>,
Lu Baolu <baolu.lu@...ux.intel.com>,
Jiri Slaby <jirislaby@...nel.org>,
Stephen Hemminger <stephen@...workplumber.org>,
Jason Gunthorpe <jgg@...pe.ca>,
Simon Ser <contact@...rsion.fr>,
"open list:DOCUMENTATION" <linux-doc@...r.kernel.org>,
open list <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
"open list:IO_URING" <io-uring@...r.kernel.org>,
"open list:NETWORKING [GENERAL]" <netdev@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] io_uring: Add io_uring command support for sockets
On Thu, Jun 22, 2023 at 08:02:37AM -0700, Breno Leitao wrote:
> On Thu, Jun 22, 2023 at 07:20:48AM +0200, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote:
> > On Wed, Jun 21, 2023 at 04:21:26PM -0700, Breno Leitao wrote:
> > > Enable io_uring commands on network sockets. Create two new
> > > SOCKET_URING_OP commands that will operate on sockets. Since these
> > > commands are similar to ioctl, uses the _IO{R,W} helpers to embedded the
> > > argument size and operation direction. Also allocates a unused ioctl
> > > chunk for uring command usage.
> > >
> > > In order to call ioctl on sockets, use the file_operations->uring_cmd
> > > callbacks, and map it to a uring socket function, which handles the
> > > SOCKET_URING_OP accordingly, and calls socket ioctls.
> > >
> > > This patches was tested by creating a new test case in liburing.
> > > Link: https://github.com/leitao/liburing/commit/3340908b742c6a26f662a0679c4ddf9df84ef431
> > >
> > > Signed-off-by: Breno Leitao <leitao@...ian.org>
> > > ---
> >
> > Isn't this a new version of an older patch?
>
> Yes, this should have tagged as V2.
>
> [1] https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/20230406144330.1932798-1-leitao@debian.org/#r
Great, also add what changed below the --- line please.
> > > --- a/Documentation/userspace-api/ioctl/ioctl-number.rst
> > > +++ b/Documentation/userspace-api/ioctl/ioctl-number.rst
> > > @@ -361,6 +361,7 @@ Code Seq# Include File Comments
> > > 0xCB 00-1F CBM serial IEC bus in development:
> > > <mailto:michael.klein@...fin.lb.shuttle.de>
> > > 0xCC 00-0F drivers/misc/ibmvmc.h pseries VMC driver
> > > +0xCC A0-BF uapi/linux/io_uring.h io_uring cmd subsystem
> >
> > This change is nice, but not totally related to this specific one,
> > shouldn't it be separate?
>
> This is related to this patch, since I am using it below, in the
> following part:
>
> +#define SOCKET_URING_OP_SIOCINQ _IOR(0xcc, 0xa0, int)
> +#define SOCKET_URING_OP_SIOCOUTQ _IOR(0xcc, 0xa1, int)
>
> Should I have a different patch, even if they are related?
Yes, as you are not using the 0xa2-0xbf range that you just carved out
here, right? Where did those numbers come from?
thanks,
greg k-h
Powered by blists - more mailing lists