Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 23.128.96.18 as permitted sender) client-ip=23.128.96.18;
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <cover.1587531463.git.josh@joshtriplett.org> <9873b8bd7d14ff8cd2a5782b434b39f076679eeb.1587531463.git.josh@joshtriplett.org>
 <CAKgNAkjo3AeA78XqK-RRGqJHNy1H8SbcjQQQs7+jDwuFgq4YSg@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAJfpegt=xe-8AayW2i3AYrk3q-=Pp_A+Hctsk+=sXoMed5hFQA@mail.gmail.com>
 <20200423004807.GC161058@localhost> <CAJfpegtSYKsApx2Dc6VGmc5Fm4SsxtAWAP-Zs052umwK1CjJmQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <20200423044226.GH161058@localhost> <CAJfpeguaVYo-Lf-5Bi=EYJYWdmCfo3BqZA=kj9E5UmDb0mBc1w@mail.gmail.com>
 <20200423073310.GA169998@localhost> <CAJfpegtXj4bSbhpx+=z=R0_ZT8uPEJAAev0O+DVg3AX242e=-g@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAJfpegtgrUACZpYR8wWoTE=Hh4Xi+4rRfrZTxRtaFVpT9GMPjw@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <CAJfpegtgrUACZpYR8wWoTE=Hh4Xi+4rRfrZTxRtaFVpT9GMPjw@mail.gmail.com>
From:   Miklos Szeredi <miklos@szeredi.hu>
Date:   Thu, 23 Apr 2020 11:20:44 +0200
Message-ID: <CAJfpegvcW9Sic8ZXgWfFQ3d8JTr53XABfP8rZzsVhCDBKCgMBw@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v5 2/3] fs: openat2: Extend open_how to allow
 userspace-selected fds
To:     Josh Triplett <josh@joshtriplett.org>
Cc:     Michael Kerrisk <mtk.manpages@gmail.com>, io-uring@vger.kernel.org,
        "linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org>,
        lkml <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
        Alexander Viro <viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk>,
        Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>, Jens Axboe <axboe@kernel.dk>,
        Aleksa Sarai <cyphar@cyphar.com>,
        linux-man <linux-man@vger.kernel.org>,
        Linux API <linux-api@vger.kernel.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Precedence: bulk

On Thu, Apr 23, 2020 at 9:57 AM Miklos Szeredi <miklos@szeredi.hu> wrote:
>
> On Thu, Apr 23, 2020 at 9:45 AM Miklos Szeredi <miklos@szeredi.hu> wrote:
>
> > > I would prefer to not introduce that limitation in the first place, and
> > > instead open normal file descriptors.
> > >
> > > > The point of O_SPECIFIC_FD is to be able to perform short
> > > > sequences of open/dosomething/close without having to block and having
> > > > to issue separate syscalls.
> > >
> > > "close" is not a required component. It's entirely possible to use
> > > io_uring to open a file descriptor, do various things with it, and then
> > > leave it open for subsequent usage via either other io_uring chains or
> > > standalone syscalls.
> >
> > If this use case arraises, we could add an op to dup/move a private
> > descriptor to a public one.  io_uring can return values, right?
> >
> > Still not convinced...
>
> Oh, and we haven't even touched on the biggest advantage of a private
> fd table: not having to dirty a cacheline on fdget/fdput due to the
> possibility of concurrent close() in a MT application.
>
> I believe this is a sticking point in some big enterprise apps and it
> may even be a driving force for io_uring.

https://lwn.net/Articles/787473/

And an interesting (very old) article referenced from above, that
gives yet a new angle on fd allocation issues:

https://lwn.net/Articles/236843/

A private fd space would be perfect for libraries such as glibc.

Thanks,
Miklos