From: Jens Axboe <axboe@kernel.dk>
To: Mikhail Malygin <m.malygin@yadro.com>, Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de>
Cc: Alexander Buev <a.buev@yadro.com>,
"linux-block@vger.kernel.org" <linux-block@vger.kernel.org>,
"Martin K . Petersen" <martin.petersen@oracle.com>,
"linux@yadro.com" <linux@yadro.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/3] implement direct IO with integrity
Date: Thu, 28 Oct 2021 09:50:15 -0600 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <14dcfef2-ac21-35a2-a97b-9cee39b079a1@kernel.dk> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <AAD8717C-E050-47C0-B8C9-119C8F51B47D@yadro.com>
On 10/28/21 9:44 AM, Mikhail Malygin wrote:
> Thanks for the feedback, we’ll submit and updated version of the series.
>
> The only question is regarding uapi: should we add a separate opcodes
> for read/write or use existing opcodes with the flag in the
> io_uring_sqe.rw_flags field?
>
> The flag was discussed in the another submission, where it was
> considered to be a better approach over opcodes:
> https://patchwork.kernel.org/project/linux-block/patch/20200226083719.4389-2-bob.liu@oracle.com/
Separate opcodes is, at least to me, definitely the way to go. Just
looking at the code needing to tap into weird spots for PI is enough to
make that call. On top of that, it also allows you to cleanly define
this command and (hopefully?) avoid that weirdness with implied PI in
the last iovec.
--
Jens Axboe
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2021-10-28 15:50 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 28+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2021-10-28 11:24 [PATCH 0/3] implement direct IO with integrity Alexander V. Buev
2021-10-28 11:24 ` [PATCH 1/3] block: bio-integrity: add PI iovec to bio Alexander V. Buev
2021-10-28 15:16 ` Christoph Hellwig
2021-10-29 0:11 ` Chaitanya Kulkarni
2021-10-29 4:27 ` Martin K. Petersen
2021-10-29 10:59 ` Alexander V. Buev
2021-10-29 8:40 ` kernel test robot
2021-10-29 8:40 ` kernel test robot
2021-10-29 8:53 ` kernel test robot
2021-10-29 8:53 ` kernel test robot
2021-10-29 9:48 ` kernel test robot
2021-10-29 9:48 ` kernel test robot
2021-10-28 11:24 ` [PATCH 2/3] block: io_uring: add IO_WITH_PI flag to SQE Alexander V. Buev
2021-10-28 11:24 ` [PATCH 3/3] block: fops: handle IOCB_USE_PI in direct IO Alexander V. Buev
2021-10-28 15:17 ` Christoph Hellwig
2021-10-29 9:04 ` kernel test robot
2021-10-29 9:04 ` kernel test robot
2021-10-28 15:13 ` [PATCH 0/3] implement direct IO with integrity Jens Axboe
2021-10-28 15:18 ` Christoph Hellwig
2021-10-28 15:20 ` Jens Axboe
2021-10-28 15:44 ` Mikhail Malygin
2021-10-28 15:50 ` Jens Axboe [this message]
2021-10-28 15:56 ` Pavel Begunkov
2021-10-28 16:22 ` Jens Axboe
2021-10-28 17:11 ` Pavel Begunkov
2021-10-28 17:45 ` Jens Axboe
2021-10-29 3:39 ` Martin K. Petersen
2021-10-28 15:25 ` Jens Axboe
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=14dcfef2-ac21-35a2-a97b-9cee39b079a1@kernel.dk \
--to=axboe@kernel.dk \
--cc=a.buev@yadro.com \
--cc=hch@lst.de \
--cc=linux-block@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux@yadro.com \
--cc=m.malygin@yadro.com \
--cc=martin.petersen@oracle.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.