[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20190311211235.GM2217@ZenIV.linux.org.uk>
Date: Mon, 11 Mar 2019 21:12:35 +0000
From: Al Viro <viro@...iv.linux.org.uk>
To: Christoph Hellwig <hch@....de>
Cc: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@...il.com>,
David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>,
Jason Baron <jbaron@...mai.com>, kgraul@...ux.ibm.com,
ktkhai@...tuozzo.com, kyeongdon.kim@....com,
Linux List Kernel Mailing <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Netdev <netdev@...r.kernel.org>, pabeni@...hat.com,
syzkaller-bugs@...glegroups.com, xiyou.wangcong@...il.com,
zhengbin <zhengbin13@...wei.com>, bcrl@...ck.org,
linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org, linux-aio@...ck.org,
houtao1@...wei.com, yi.zhang@...wei.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH 8/8] aio: move sanity checks and request allocation to
io_submit_one()
On Mon, Mar 11, 2019 at 08:48:30PM +0100, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> On Sun, Mar 10, 2019 at 07:08:22AM +0000, Al Viro wrote:
> > From: Al Viro <viro@...iv.linux.org.uk>
> >
> > makes for somewhat cleaner control flow in __io_submit_one()
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Al Viro <viro@...iv.linux.org.uk>
>
> I wonder if we should even bother keeping __io_submit_one. Splitting
> that out was prep work from Jens for something that eventually turned
> into io_uring.
*shrug*
I think it's a bit easier to keep track of control flow - failure exits
are simpler that way.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists