From: Jens Axboe <axboe@kernel.dk>
To: "Dmitry V. Levin" <ldv@altlinux.org>
Cc: Eugene Syromiatnikov <esyr@redhat.com>,
Pavel Begunkov <asml.silence@gmail.com>,
io-uring@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
linux-api@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] io-wq: expose IO_WQ_ACCT_* enumeration items to UAPI
Date: Sun, 12 Sep 2021 16:49:15 -0600 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <7d702960-bb2b-4abb-29b4-4f169db7ecf2@kernel.dk> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20210912222434.GD18053@altlinux.org>
On 9/12/21 4:24 PM, Dmitry V. Levin wrote:
> On Sun, Sep 12, 2021 at 12:29:41PM -0600, Jens Axboe wrote:
>> On 9/12/21 6:24 AM, Eugene Syromiatnikov wrote:
>>> These are used to index aargument of IORING_REGISTER_IOWQ_MAX_WORKERS
>>> io_uring_register command, so they are to be exposed in UAPI.
>>
>> Not sure that's necessary, as it's really just a boolean values - is
>> the worker type bounded or not. That said, not against making it
>> available for userspace, but definitely not IO_WQ_ACCT_NR. It
>> should probably just go in liburing, I guess.
>
> If IO_WQ_ACCT_* were just boolean values, no enum would have been
> introduced in the first place. What's the benefit of hiding
> the API in the implementation, or burying it inside liburing?
Because it's easier to grok internally with an enum instead of
using 0/1. And you could argue that's the case too for an app,
and as I said, I'm not against making them exposed, but the _NR
part is strictly internal.
Just add separate defines or an enum in io_uring.h:
enum {
IO_WQ_BOUND,
IO_WQ_UNBOUND,
};
and be done with it.
--
Jens Axboe
prev parent reply other threads:[~2021-09-12 22:49 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 4+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2021-09-12 12:24 [PATCH] io-wq: expose IO_WQ_ACCT_* enumeration items to UAPI Eugene Syromiatnikov
2021-09-12 18:29 ` Jens Axboe
2021-09-12 22:24 ` Dmitry V. Levin
2021-09-12 22:49 ` Jens Axboe [this message]
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=7d702960-bb2b-4abb-29b4-4f169db7ecf2@kernel.dk \
--to=axboe@kernel.dk \
--cc=asml.silence@gmail.com \
--cc=esyr@redhat.com \
--cc=io-uring@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=ldv@altlinux.org \
--cc=linux-api@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
/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.