Re: [PATCH 1/2] io_uring/cmd: split io_uring_cmd_set_res() from io_uring_cmd_done()
Caleb Sander Mateos <[email protected]>
| Newsgroups | org.infradead.lists.linux-nvme,dev.linux.lists.fuse-devel,org.kernel.vger.io-uring,org.kernel.vger.linux-block,org.kernel.vger.linux-btrfs,org.kernel.vger.linux-kernel,org.kernel.vger.linux-scsi |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <CADUfDZoEosgMMQ47BDWBskTOZrYZpg6VUT5c4kwczDLRLXYk=Q@mail.gmail.com> |
On Thu, Aug 27, 2026 at 1:05 PM Joanne Koong <[email protected]> wrote: > > Hi Caleb, > > On Thu, Aug 27, 2026 at 11:57 AM Caleb Sander Mateos > <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > In preparation for setting the io_uring NVMe passthru CQE results from > > the blk-mq request completion rather than the task work callback, split > > out functions io_uring_cmd_set_res{,32}() from io_uring_cmd_done{,32}(). > > This allows io_uring_cmd_done{,32}() and __io_uring_cmd_done() to be > > consolidated into a single CQE-size-agnostic function with 3 fewer > > arguments than __io_uring_cmd_done(). > > > > The conversion looks logically correct to me but the interface feels a > bit annoying / fragile on the caller side. > > Is there a way nvme can get what it needs without changing the other > callers? Would it work to just keep the existing > io_uring_cmd_done{,32}() as is and add a separate API for special > callers like nvme, eg: > > void io_uring_cmd_set_res32(struct io_uring_cmd *cmd, s32 ret, u64 res2); > void __io_uring_cmd_done(struct io_uring_cmd *cmd, unsigned issue_flags); > > where io_uring_cmd_done{,32} would then just be inline wrappers over > those? afaict, then only the nvme callsite would have to change and > fuse, btrfs, block, ublk, and scsi_bsg could just stay as is. Do you > think something like that makes sense to do? Sure, sounds fine to me. Thanks for taking a look. Best, Caleb