From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1753211AbWKWIYe (ORCPT ); Thu, 23 Nov 2006 03:24:34 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1754887AbWKWIYd (ORCPT ); Thu, 23 Nov 2006 03:24:33 -0500 Received: from ecfrec.frec.bull.fr ([129.183.4.8]:61391 "EHLO ecfrec.frec.bull.fr") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753211AbWKWIYc convert rfc822-to-8bit (ORCPT ); Thu, 23 Nov 2006 03:24:32 -0500 Date: Thu, 23 Nov 2006 09:24:33 +0100 From: =?ISO-8859-1?Q?S=E9bastien_Dugu=E9?= To: Zach Brown Cc: linux-kernel , linux-aio , Andrew Morton , Suparna Bhattacharya , Christoph Hellwig , Badari Pulavarty , Jean Pierre Dion , Ulrich Drepper Subject: Re: [PATCH -mm 3/4][AIO] - AIO completion signal notification Message-ID: <20061123092433.1d2b9c95@frecb000686> In-Reply-To: <456424D7.7060204@oracle.com> References: <20061120151700.4a4f9407@frecb000686> <20061120152252.7e5a4229@frecb000686> <4561C60B.5000106@oracle.com> <20061122104055.3d1c029a@frecb000686> <456424D7.7060204@oracle.com> X-Mailer: Sylpheed-Claws 2.6.0 (GTK+ 2.8.20; i486-pc-linux-gnu) Mime-Version: 1.0 X-MIMETrack: Itemize by SMTP Server on ECN002/FR/BULL(Release 5.0.12 |February 13, 2003) at 23/11/2006 09:31:35, Serialize by Router on ECN002/FR/BULL(Release 5.0.12 |February 13, 2003) at 23/11/2006 09:31:36, Serialize complete at 23/11/2006 09:31:36 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8BIT Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Wed, 22 Nov 2006 02:22:15 -0800 Zach Brown wrote: > > OK, looking at this, there's something bothering me: io_submit_one() needs > > a pointer to the user iocb in order to push back the iocb->ki_key to userspace, > > as well as storing the user_iocb pointer into iocb->ki_obj. > > Why can't it continue to do what it does today? Both of those uses of > the user_iocb pointer involve fixed-width fields and don't need compat help. Aah, right, thanks. > > > So I think that some of the logic in io_submit_one() must be moved up to > > sys_io_submit(), including the aio_get_req() call. > > I don't see why that would be needed. Not anymore, indeed. Thanks, Sébastien.