[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <8fde7b95-fed0-4cfd-a47e-455cccf1a190@oracle.com>
Date: Fri, 8 Mar 2024 17:15:21 +0000
From: John Garry <john.g.garry@...cle.com>
To: Jens Axboe <axboe@...nel.dk>, kbusch@...nel.org, hch@....de,
sagi@...mberg.me, jejb@...ux.ibm.com, martin.petersen@...cle.com,
djwong@...nel.org, viro@...iv.linux.org.uk, brauner@...nel.org,
dchinner@...hat.com, jack@...e.cz
Cc: linux-block@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
linux-nvme@...ts.infradead.org, linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org,
tytso@....edu, jbongio@...gle.com, linux-scsi@...r.kernel.org,
ojaswin@...ux.ibm.com, linux-aio@...ck.org,
linux-btrfs@...r.kernel.org, io-uring@...r.kernel.org,
nilay@...ux.ibm.com, ritesh.list@...il.com,
Prasad Singamsetty <prasad.singamsetty@...cle.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v5 03/10] fs: Initial atomic write support
On 08/03/2024 17:05, Jens Axboe wrote:
>> And the callers can hardcode rw_type?
> Yep, basically making the change identical to the aio one. Not sure why
> you did it differently in those two spots.
In the aio code, rw_type was readily available. For io_uring it was not,
and I chose to derive from something locally available. But that's a bit
awkward and is not good for performance, so I'll follow your suggestion.
Thanks,
John
Powered by blists - more mailing lists