Received: by 2002:ac0:a594:0:0:0:0:0 with SMTP id m20-v6csp4254737imm; Fri, 18 May 2018 01:54:41 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-Smtp-Source: AB8JxZrsdxlR/j8ejJnfm6K6HnHOGMJha+HsRRPCZg2g2KDdX8XJ3+lLFazDSTo9dDCtYp1WLard X-Received: by 2002:a17:902:42a3:: with SMTP id h32-v6mr8734631pld.72.1526633681050; Fri, 18 May 2018 01:54:41 -0700 (PDT) ARC-Seal: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; t=1526633681; cv=none; d=google.com; s=arc-20160816; b=X4VL9g1ha34Jf0OgJvzVlkC0N8gFR5WyTq/1OgYjJ6hv2k77dwsaZwYDTgHGIYz3S4 +Rx2rgYMyPn77jWD9x/PikCfv701MHZBIjsMrXCi1uqVgp0ahsh7d1XZMNIslmgpGWhb suPo5DTQtrwQDboBWRmm/jQ+65GmLqOXBQPld+HA5ZOdbwu0/EFmBN9Bb+G1lZyAzUrX NU4yg5pPyw9uAKH7wSq0iVIE7rdOmBUfGIzBEK16QYSANi760Vs9DNf/5Mr8FrxjtqAz OPlyuSRFLsIOvQ8A0AKS8cSckA6Ftke+wZ7jwNrT5IGtfFgDu4tOJrUoohYIXsWvMboq lb2w== ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=arc-20160816; h=list-id:precedence:sender:user-agent:in-reply-to :content-disposition:mime-version:references:message-id:subject:cc :to:from:date:arc-authentication-results; bh=k8RBwRBaA+hipyvjjNNaUCzffWnKkQpsjQfmBo3aL3Y=; b=REX3xEZ8lhDZqjm+I/iNS/jSJQpl4N74N5Gtmj+8ZRWpkkmzcnIL01hApMSq0MurXg +vkto64FbhLBJaYdKDSDE0JXQAHlg6ypbX8U792lTW8JpxeDocVSf/vMnjZF7ep1ZxMu v1W/NvQTzE517uWwQz35TzKATldHCyR/Ge6UY/VFn4MRgjTkyf5pHcahEHBapNG3xGEW +D7zxVIRhGSLr1QE5/STgHWYAfye1dlZ7oAoolT98Ea4imFsERbbKDwEQ3rTRjDVtKS0 lX+Cz4tYthwOnhWfIhyyQeXW+Ut+cpmFWDWLPYvrv3Jys9NhOo6P6T1v0FfzYx3C/Qaz XTvA== ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; mx.google.com; spf=pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Return-Path: Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org. [209.132.180.67]) by mx.google.com with ESMTP id j4-v6si6686971plt.430.2018.05.18.01.54.26; Fri, 18 May 2018 01:54:41 -0700 (PDT) Received-SPF: pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) client-ip=209.132.180.67; Authentication-Results: mx.google.com; spf=pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1752385AbeERIxM (ORCPT + 99 others); Fri, 18 May 2018 04:53:12 -0400 Received: from verein.lst.de ([213.95.11.211]:57801 "EHLO newverein.lst.de" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752383AbeERIwu (ORCPT ); Fri, 18 May 2018 04:52:50 -0400 Received: by newverein.lst.de (Postfix, from userid 2407) id A566468CEE; Fri, 18 May 2018 10:57:31 +0200 (CEST) Date: Fri, 18 May 2018 10:57:31 +0200 From: Christoph Hellwig To: James Hogan Cc: Christoph Hellwig , viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk, Avi Kivity , linux-aio@kvack.org, linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, linux-api@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH 7/7] aio: implement io_pgetevents Message-ID: <20180518085731.GA24387@lst.de> References: <20180502211448.18276-1-hch@lst.de> <20180502211448.18276-8-hch@lst.de> <20180518082837.GA3264@jamesdev> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20180518082837.GA3264@jamesdev> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.17 (2007-11-01) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Fri, May 18, 2018 at 09:28:38AM +0100, James Hogan wrote: > Given this: > > On Wed, May 02, 2018 at 11:14:48PM +0200, Christoph Hellwig wrote: > > +struct __aio_sigset { > > + sigset_t __user *sigmask; > > + size_t sigsetsize; > > +}; > > and: > > > +asmlinkage long sys_io_pgetevents(aio_context_t ctx_id, > > + long min_nr, > > + long nr, > > + struct io_event __user *events, > > + struct timespec __user *timeout, > > + const struct __aio_sigset *sig); > > The following paragraph in the commit message would appear to be > misleading since __aio_sigset contains a size: > > > Note that unlike many other signal related calls we do not pass a sigmask > > size, as that would get us to 7 arguments, which aren't easily supported > > by the syscall infrastructure. It seems a lot less painful to just add a > > new syscall variant in the unlikely case we're going to increase the > > sigset size. > > Is it possible to correct it before this gets merged? True, the calling convention change based on feedback. Al, is the branch stable or you can edit this out?