[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20231019083305.6d309f82@kernel.org>
Date: Thu, 19 Oct 2023 08:33:05 -0700
From: Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>
To: Jens Axboe <axboe@...nel.dk>
Cc: Breno Leitao <leitao@...ian.org>, sdf@...gle.com,
asml.silence@...il.com, willemdebruijn.kernel@...il.com, pabeni@...hat.com,
martin.lau@...ux.dev, krisman@...e.de, bpf@...r.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
io-uring@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v7 00/11] io_uring: Initial support for {s,g}etsockopt
commands
On Thu, 19 Oct 2023 08:58:59 -0600 Jens Axboe wrote:
> On 10/16/23 7:47 AM, Breno Leitao wrote:
> > This patchset adds support for getsockopt (SOCKET_URING_OP_GETSOCKOPT)
> > and setsockopt (SOCKET_URING_OP_SETSOCKOPT) in io_uring commands.
> > SOCKET_URING_OP_SETSOCKOPT implements generic case, covering all levels
> > and optnames. SOCKET_URING_OP_GETSOCKOPT is limited, for now, to
> > SOL_SOCKET level, which seems to be the most common level parameter for
> > get/setsockopt(2).
> >
> > In order to keep the implementation (and tests) simple, some refactors
> > were done prior to the changes, as follows:
>
> Looks like folks are mostly happy with this now, so the next question is
> how to stage it?
Would be good to get acks from BPF folks but AFAICT first four patches
apply cleanly for us now. If they apply cleanly for you I reckon you
can take them directly with io-uring. It's -rc7 time, with a bit of
luck we'll get to the merge window without a conflict.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists