Re: net: Remove iocb argument from sendmsg and recvmsg

2015-03-11 Thread Tadeusz Struk
On 03/10/2015 09:02 PM, David Miller wrote: Because of the way you quoted the patch, it looked like a list posting looping back to the list again, because of the List-ID: email header. Therefore your posting was blocked and you'll have to resend your posting in a way such that this

Re: net: Remove iocb argument from sendmsg and recvmsg

2015-03-11 Thread Tadeusz Struk
On 03/10/2015 09:06 PM, David Miller wrote: From: Ying Xue ying@windriver.com Date: Wed, 11 Mar 2015 11:18:01 +0800 Sorry, I did not realize the case when I created the commit. However, although I don't understand its scenario, in my opinion, adding one redundant argument for all

Re: net: Remove iocb argument from sendmsg and recvmsg

2015-03-10 Thread Tadeusz Struk
On 03/10/2015 08:18 PM, Ying Xue wrote: Sorry, I did not realize the case when I created the commit. However, although I don't understand its scenario, in my opinion, adding one redundant argument for all sockets to satisfy the special case seems unreasonable for us. In my opinion this is

Re: net: Remove iocb argument from sendmsg and recvmsg

2015-03-10 Thread David Miller
From: Tadeusz Struk tadeusz.st...@intel.com Date: Tue, 10 Mar 2015 20:25:29 -0700 In my opinion this is not about a single, special case, but rather about being able to support asynchronous operations on socket interface. Nobody used the socket AIO facility for two decades, it just rotted and

Re: net: Remove iocb argument from sendmsg and recvmsg

2015-03-10 Thread Ying Xue
Sorry, I did not realize the case when I created the commit. However, although I don't understand its scenario, in my opinion, adding one redundant argument for all sockets to satisfy the special case seems unreasonable for us. Regards, Ying On 03/11/2015 10:37 AM, Tadeusz Struk wrote: Hi,

Re: net: Remove iocb argument from sendmsg and recvmsg

2015-03-10 Thread David Miller
From: Ying Xue ying@windriver.com Date: Wed, 11 Mar 2015 11:18:01 +0800 Sorry, I did not realize the case when I created the commit. However, although I don't understand its scenario, in my opinion, adding one redundant argument for all sockets to satisfy the special case seems

Re: net: Remove iocb argument from sendmsg and recvmsg

2015-03-10 Thread Tadeusz Struk
On 03/10/2015 09:06 PM, David Miller wrote: In my opinion this is not about a single, special case, but rather about being able to support asynchronous operations on socket interface. Nobody used the socket AIO facility for two decades, it just rotted and turned out to be buggy and

Re: net: Remove iocb argument from sendmsg and recvmsg

2015-03-10 Thread David Miller
Because of the way you quoted the patch, it looked like a list posting looping back to the list again, because of the List-ID: email header. Therefore your posting was blocked and you'll have to resend your posting in a way such that this doesn't happen. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send

Re: [PATCH net-next v2 0/2] net: Remove iocb argument from sendmsg and recvmsg

2015-03-09 Thread Herbert Xu
David Miller da...@davemloft.net wrote: From: Ying Xue ying@windriver.com Date: Mon, 2 Mar 2015 15:37:46 +0800 Currently there is only one user - TIPC whose sendmsg() instances using iocb argument. Meanwhile, there is no user using iocb argument in its recvmsg() instance. Therefore, if