[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <6f0a9137-2d2b-7294-f59f-0fcf9cdfc72d@gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 17 Oct 2022 17:46:57 +0100
From: Pavel Begunkov <asml.silence@...il.com>
To: Stefan Metzmacher <metze@...ba.org>,
io-uring <io-uring@...r.kernel.org>, Jens Axboe <axboe@...nel.dk>
Cc: Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>, netdev <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
Dylan Yudaken <dylany@...com>
Subject: Re: IORING_CQE_F_COPIED
Hey Stefan,
On 10/14/22 12:06, Stefan Metzmacher wrote:
> Hi Pavel,
>
> In the tests I made I used this version of IORING_CQE_F_COPIED:
> https://git.samba.org/?p=metze/linux/wip.git;a=commitdiff;h=645d3b584c417a247d92d71baa6266a5f3d0d17d
> (also inlined at the end)
>
> Would that something we want for 6.1? (Should I post that with a useful commit message, after doing some more tests)
I was thinking, can it be delivered separately but not in the same cqe?
The intention is to keep it off the IO path. For example, it can emit a
zc status CQE or maybe keep a "zc failed" counter inside the ring. Other
options? And we can add a separate callback for that, will make a couple
of things better.
What do you think? Especially from the userspace usability perspective.
--
Pavel Begunkov
Powered by blists - more mailing lists