Re: [LTP] io_uring: Redesign common helpers to follow liburing API conventions

[linuxtestproject.agent@gmail.com]

Hi Sebastian,

On Mon, Jun 8 2026, Sebastian Chlad wrote:
> io_uring: Redesign common helpers to follow liburing API conventions

--- [PATCH 1/3] ---

> - io_uring_prep_rw(): generic SQE fill for read/write perations

Typo: "perations" -> "operations".

> -static inline void io_uring_submit_sqe_internal(struct io_uring_submit *s,
> -                                               int fd, int opcode,
> [...]
> -static inline void io_uring_do_io_op(struct io_uring_submit *s, int fd,
> [...]
> -static inline void io_uring_do_vec_io_op(struct io_uring_submit *s, int fd,

This patch removes io_uring_submit_sqe_internal(),
io_uring_do_io_op() and io_uring_do_vec_io_op() from the header, but
io_uring01.c and io_uring03.c still reference them until patches 2/3
and 3/3. After applying only this commit the tree does not compile,
which breaks git-bisect.

The false-positive guide (section 10) lists "remove the consumer
before deleting the API" as the correct ordering. Could the series be
reordered so that the callers are migrated first, or the header change
is squashed with the caller updates?

> +static inline const char *ioring_op_name(int op)

ioring_op_name() was previously called only by the removed helpers
io_uring_do_io_op() and io_uring_do_vec_io_op(). After this series
it has no callers and is dead code. Should it be removed here, or is
there a planned consumer?

Verdict: Needs revision

---
Note:

The agent can sometimes produce false positives although often its
findings are genuine. If you find issues with the review, please
comment this email or ignore the suggestions.

Regards,
LTP AI Reviewer

-- 
Mailing list info: https://lists.linux.it/listinfo/ltp