On Thu, Sep 02, 2021 at 03:59:25AM -0300, Leonardo Bras Soares Passos wrote: > I also suggested something like that, but I thought it could be good if we > could > fall back to io_writev() if we didn't have the zerocopy feature (or > the async feature). > > What do you think?
That fallback looks safe and ok, I'm just not sure whether it'll be of great help. E.g. if we provide an QIO api that allows both sync write and zero-copy write (then we do the fallback when necessary), it means the buffer implication applies too to this api, so it's easier to me to just detect the zero copy capability and use one alternative. Thanks, -- Peter Xu
