On Fri, Jan 29, 2021 at 07:37:03AM +0200, Lennert Buytenhek wrote:
> > > > One open question is whether IORING_OP_GETDENTS64 should be more like
> > > > pread(2) and allow passing in a starting offset to read from the
> > > > directory from. (This would require some more surgery in
On Fri, Jan 29, 2021 at 01:07:10AM +0200, Lennert Buytenhek wrote:
> > > One open question is whether IORING_OP_GETDENTS64 should be more like
> > > pread(2) and allow passing in a starting offset to read from the
> > > directory from. (This would require some more surgery in fs/readdir.c.)
> >
On Sun, Jan 24, 2021 at 10:21:38PM +, David Laight wrote:
> > One open question is whether IORING_OP_GETDENTS64 should be more like
> > pread(2) and allow passing in a starting offset to read from the
> > directory from. (This would require some more surgery in fs/readdir.c.)
>
> Since
On Sat, Jan 23, 2021 at 04:33:34PM -0700, Jens Axboe wrote:
> >> IORING_OP_GETDENTS64 behaves like getdents64(2) and takes the same
> >
> > Could we drop the '64'? We don't, for example, have IOURING_OP_FADVISE64
> > even though that's the name of the syscall.
>
> Agreed, only case we do mimic
> One open question is whether IORING_OP_GETDENTS64 should be more like
> pread(2) and allow passing in a starting offset to read from the
> directory from. (This would require some more surgery in fs/readdir.c.)
Since directories are seekable this ought to work.
Modulo horrid issues with 32bit
Hi,
On 2021-01-24 01:59:05 +, Al Viro wrote:
> On Sat, Jan 23, 2021 at 03:50:55PM -0800, Andres Freund wrote:
>
> > As there's only a shared lock, seems like both would end up with the
> > same ctx->pos and end up updating f_pos to the same offset (assuming the
> > same count).
> >
> > Am I
On Sat, Jan 23, 2021 at 03:50:55PM -0800, Andres Freund wrote:
> As there's only a shared lock, seems like both would end up with the
> same ctx->pos and end up updating f_pos to the same offset (assuming the
> same count).
>
> Am I missing something?
This:
f = fdget_pos(fd);
if
Hi,
On 2021-01-23 15:50:55 -0800, Andres Freund wrote:
> It's also not clear to me that right now you'd necessarily get correct
> results if multiple IORING_OP_GETDENTS64 for the same fd get processed
> in different workers. Looking at iterate_dir(), it looks to me that the
> locking around the
Hi,
On 2021-01-23 13:41:52 +0200, Lennert Buytenhek wrote:
> IORING_OP_GETDENTS64 behaves like getdents64(2) and takes the same
> arguments.
I've wished for this before, this would be awesome.
> One open question is whether IORING_OP_GETDENTS64 should be more like
> pread(2) and allow passing
On 1/23/21 4:27 PM, Matthew Wilcox wrote:
> On Sat, Jan 23, 2021 at 01:41:52PM +0200, Lennert Buytenhek wrote:
>> IORING_OP_GETDENTS64 behaves like getdents64(2) and takes the same
>
> Could we drop the '64'? We don't, for example, have IOURING_OP_FADVISE64
> even though that's the name of the
On Sat, Jan 23, 2021 at 01:41:52PM +0200, Lennert Buytenhek wrote:
> IORING_OP_GETDENTS64 behaves like getdents64(2) and takes the same
Could we drop the '64'? We don't, for example, have IOURING_OP_FADVISE64
even though that's the name of the syscall.
On 1/23/21 11:16 AM, Lennert Buytenhek wrote:
> On Sat, Jan 23, 2021 at 10:37:25AM -0700, Jens Axboe wrote:
>
>>> IORING_OP_GETDENTS64 behaves like getdents64(2) and takes the same
>>> arguments.
>>>
>>> Signed-off-by: Lennert Buytenhek
>>> ---
>>> This seems to work OK, but I'd appreciate a
On Sat, Jan 23, 2021 at 10:37:25AM -0700, Jens Axboe wrote:
> > IORING_OP_GETDENTS64 behaves like getdents64(2) and takes the same
> > arguments.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Lennert Buytenhek
> > ---
> > This seems to work OK, but I'd appreciate a review from someone more
> > familiar with io_uring
On 1/23/21 4:41 AM, Lennert Buytenhek wrote:
> IORING_OP_GETDENTS64 behaves like getdents64(2) and takes the same
> arguments.
>
> Signed-off-by: Lennert Buytenhek
> ---
> This seems to work OK, but I'd appreciate a review from someone more
> familiar with io_uring internals than I am, as I'm
IORING_OP_GETDENTS64 behaves like getdents64(2) and takes the same
arguments.
Signed-off-by: Lennert Buytenhek
---
This seems to work OK, but I'd appreciate a review from someone more
familiar with io_uring internals than I am, as I'm not entirely sure
I did everything quite right.
A dumb test
15 matches
Mail list logo
