[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <Z9jTYWAvcWJNyaIN@sidongui-MacBookPro.local>
Date: Tue, 18 Mar 2025 10:58:57 +0900
From: Sidong Yang <sidong.yang@...iosa.ai>
To: Jens Axboe <axboe@...nel.dk>
Cc: Josef Bacik <josef@...icpanda.com>, David Sterba <dsterba@...e.com>,
Pavel Begunkov <asml.silence@...il.com>,
linux-btrfs@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
io-uring@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH v4 4/5] btrfs: ioctl: introduce
btrfs_uring_import_iovec()
On Mon, Mar 17, 2025 at 09:40:05AM -0600, Jens Axboe wrote:
> On 3/17/25 7:57 AM, Sidong Yang wrote:
> > This patch introduces btrfs_uring_import_iovec(). In encoded read/write
> > with uring cmd, it uses import_iovec without supporting fixed buffer.
> > btrfs_using_import_iovec() could use fixed buffer if cmd flags has
> > IORING_URING_CMD_FIXED.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Sidong Yang <sidong.yang@...iosa.ai>
> > ---
> > fs/btrfs/ioctl.c | 32 ++++++++++++++++++++++++--------
> > 1 file changed, 24 insertions(+), 8 deletions(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/fs/btrfs/ioctl.c b/fs/btrfs/ioctl.c
> > index 6c18bad53cd3..a7b52fd99059 100644
> > --- a/fs/btrfs/ioctl.c
> > +++ b/fs/btrfs/ioctl.c
> > @@ -4802,6 +4802,28 @@ struct btrfs_uring_encoded_data {
> > struct iov_iter iter;
> > };
> >
> > +static int btrfs_uring_import_iovec(struct io_uring_cmd *cmd,
> > + unsigned int issue_flags, int rw)
> > +{
> > + struct btrfs_uring_encoded_data *data =
> > + io_uring_cmd_get_async_data(cmd)->op_data;
> > + int ret;
> > +
> > + if (cmd && (cmd->flags & IORING_URING_CMD_FIXED)) {
> > + data->iov = NULL;
> > + ret = io_uring_cmd_import_fixed_vec(cmd, data->args.iov,
> > + data->args.iovcnt,
> > + ITER_DEST, issue_flags,
> > + &data->iter);
> > + } else {
> > + data->iov = data->iovstack;
> > + ret = import_iovec(rw, data->args.iov, data->args.iovcnt,
> > + ARRAY_SIZE(data->iovstack), &data->iov,
> > + &data->iter);
> > + }
> > + return ret;
> > +}
>
> How can 'cmd' be NULL here?
It seems that there is no checkes for 'cmd' before and it works same as before.
But I think it's better to add a check in function start for safety.
>
>
> --
> Jens Axboe
>
Powered by blists - more mailing lists