lists.openwall.net | lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC | |
Open Source and information security mailing list archives
| ||
|
Message-ID: <ZC72UKx/sA4syPfK@kbusch-mbp.dhcp.thefacebook.com> Date: Thu, 6 Apr 2023 10:41:52 -0600 From: Keith Busch <kbusch@...nel.org> To: Breno Leitao <leitao@...ian.org> Cc: io-uring@...r.kernel.org, netdev@...r.kernel.org, kuba@...nel.org, asml.silence@...il.com, axboe@...nel.dk, leit@...com, edumazet@...gle.com, pabeni@...hat.com, davem@...emloft.net, dccp@...r.kernel.org, mptcp@...ts.linux.dev, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, dsahern@...nel.org, willemdebruijn.kernel@...il.com, matthieu.baerts@...sares.net, marcelo.leitner@...il.com Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/5] add initial io_uring_cmd support for sockets On Thu, Apr 06, 2023 at 07:43:26AM -0700, Breno Leitao wrote: > This patchset creates the initial plumbing for a io_uring command for > sockets. > > For now, create two uring commands for sockets, SOCKET_URING_OP_SIOCOUTQ > and SOCKET_URING_OP_SIOCINQ. They are similar to ioctl operations > SIOCOUTQ and SIOCINQ. In fact, the code on the protocol side itself is > heavily based on the ioctl operations. Do you have asynchronous operations in mind for a future patch? The io_uring command infrastructure makes more sense for operations that return EIOCBQUEUED, otherwise it doesn't have much benefit over ioctl. > In order to test this code, I created a liburing test, which is > currently located at [1], and I will create a pull request once we are > good with this patch. > > I've also run test/io_uring_passthrough to make sure the first patch > didn't regressed the NVME passthrough path. > > This patchset is a RFC for two different reasons: > * It changes slighlty on how IO uring command operates. I.e, we are > now passing the whole SQE to the io_uring_cmd callback (instead of > an opaque buffer). This seems to be more palatable instead of > creating some custom structure just to fit small parameters, as in > SOCKET_URING_OP_SIOC{IN,OUT}Q. Is this OK? I think I'm missing something from this series. Where is the io_uring_cmd change to point to the sqe?
Powered by blists - more mailing lists