| Message ID | 20210202082353.2152271-1-dkadashev@gmail.com (mailing list archive) |
|---|---|
| Headers | show |
| Series | io_uring: add mkdirat support | expand |
On Tue, Feb 2, 2021 at 3:24 PM Dmitry Kadashev <dkadashev@gmail.com> wrote: > > This adds mkdirat support to io_uring and is heavily based on recently > added renameat() / unlinkat() support. > > The first patch is preparation with no functional changes, makes > do_mkdirat accept struct filename pointer rather than the user string. > > The second one leverages that to implement mkdirat in io_uring. > > Based on for-5.11/io_uring. > > Changes since v1: > - do not mess with struct filename's refcount in do_mkdirat, instead add > and use __filename_create() that does not drop the name on success; > > Dmitry Kadashev (2): > fs: make do_mkdirat() take struct filename > io_uring: add support for IORING_OP_MKDIRAT > > fs/internal.h | 1 + > fs/io_uring.c | 58 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ > fs/namei.c | 25 +++++++++++---- > include/uapi/linux/io_uring.h | 1 + > 4 files changed, 79 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-) Hi Jens, Ping. I've tried reaching out to Al wrt the first patch, but that did not seem to work. Is there a chance to get this into 5.12 at this point?
On 2/2/21 1:23 AM, Dmitry Kadashev wrote: > This adds mkdirat support to io_uring and is heavily based on recently > added renameat() / unlinkat() support. > > The first patch is preparation with no functional changes, makes > do_mkdirat accept struct filename pointer rather than the user string. > > The second one leverages that to implement mkdirat in io_uring. > > Based on for-5.11/io_uring. Can you check if it still applies against for-5.13/io_uring? Both the vfs and io_uring bits. It'd be nice to get this moving forward, there's no reason why this should keep getting stalled.
On Tue, Mar 30, 2021 at 3:37 AM Jens Axboe <axboe@kernel.dk> wrote: > On 2/2/21 1:23 AM, Dmitry Kadashev wrote: > > Based on for-5.11/io_uring. Actually this was a typo (copy-n-paste error), it was on top of for-5.12/io_uring. Doesn't really matter though. > Can you check if it still applies against for-5.13/io_uring? Both the > vfs and io_uring bits. It does not (the io_uring bits), I'll send v3 soon.