On Tue, Oct 20, 2009 at 12:12:55PM +0200, Kevin Wolf wrote: > On that note, falling back to POSIX AIO means that paio_submit is called > with a Linux AIO aio_ctx. Which works because this parameter is unused > anyway, but am I the only one to find this ugly? > > What is the public interface of paio_submit meant to look like at all? > If aio_ctx is guaranteed to be unused, why not drop it or pass NULL at > least? And if it could be used some time in the future, the raw block > driver needs to be fixed.
Agreed. Cared to send a patch? > That said, I don't even think that the raw block driver is the right > place to distinguish between different AIO variants. Having a generic > aio_submit that calls the right AIO driver depending on the context > would be much cleaner. This would also mean that laio_submit handles the > fallback to paio_submit on its own, which I think is much cleaner than > teaching raw about the capabilities of each driver. Seems a bit overkill until we get even more AIO variants at least. And yes, that whole area is really ugly.
