From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 10202C6FD1D for ; Thu, 30 Mar 2023 15:08:55 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S232749AbjC3PIy (ORCPT ); Thu, 30 Mar 2023 11:08:54 -0400 Received: from lindbergh.monkeyblade.net ([23.128.96.19]:54824 "EHLO lindbergh.monkeyblade.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S232745AbjC3PIx (ORCPT ); Thu, 30 Mar 2023 11:08:53 -0400 Received: from us-smtp-delivery-124.mimecast.com (us-smtp-delivery-124.mimecast.com [170.10.133.124]) by lindbergh.monkeyblade.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 5564ECC19 for ; Thu, 30 Mar 2023 08:07:33 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=redhat.com; s=mimecast20190719; t=1680188852; h=from:from:reply-to:subject:subject:date:date:message-id:message-id: to:to:cc:cc:mime-version:mime-version:content-type:content-type: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=flEdophtYQM+tpSiaQIdRAJlRLOhJGfz1jgwJJ1BJnE=; b=D2/zoTVaK5/uJkNaN30oMrhqzJcpn0n5t/RibVEUhO5wIRcl/2vs5ywu7Bz5L2I4+c2vBg QkReaKQ+BGoyuPKjSlAPy8sVK66ZBSW8fZoNOp9BK/lHcqdIC5Xj4aMKAUha7rloOaRlUa xQNuJn4ibg8qOmFXibniJ016YNnNmxc= Received: from mimecast-mx02.redhat.com (mimecast-mx02.redhat.com [66.187.233.88]) by relay.mimecast.com with ESMTP with STARTTLS (version=TLSv1.2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_GCM_SHA384) id us-mta-654-dFQTAMfoPD2U4QyvYcJNIw-1; Thu, 30 Mar 2023 11:07:28 -0400 X-MC-Unique: dFQTAMfoPD2U4QyvYcJNIw-1 Received: from smtp.corp.redhat.com (int-mx08.intmail.prod.int.rdu2.redhat.com [10.11.54.8]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mimecast-mx02.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 8D419858297; Thu, 30 Mar 2023 15:07:27 +0000 (UTC) Received: from warthog.procyon.org.uk (unknown [10.33.36.18]) by smtp.corp.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 938B4C15BA0; Thu, 30 Mar 2023 15:07:25 +0000 (UTC) Organization: Red Hat UK Ltd. Registered Address: Red Hat UK Ltd, Amberley Place, 107-111 Peascod Street, Windsor, Berkshire, SI4 1TE, United Kingdom. Registered in England and Wales under Company Registration No. 3798903 From: David Howells In-Reply-To: <64259c7b2b327_21883920818@willemb.c.googlers.com.notmuch> References: <64259c7b2b327_21883920818@willemb.c.googlers.com.notmuch> <20230329141354.516864-1-dhowells@redhat.com> <20230329141354.516864-5-dhowells@redhat.com> To: Willem de Bruijn Cc: dhowells@redhat.com, Matthew Wilcox , "David S. Miller" , Eric Dumazet , Jakub Kicinski , Paolo Abeni , Al Viro , Christoph Hellwig , Jens Axboe , Jeff Layton , Christian Brauner , Chuck Lever III , Linus Torvalds , netdev@vger.kernel.org, linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-mm@kvack.org Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH v2 04/48] net: Declare MSG_SPLICE_PAGES internal sendmsg() flag MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-ID: <854581.1680188845.1@warthog.procyon.org.uk> Date: Thu, 30 Mar 2023 16:07:25 +0100 Message-ID: <854582.1680188845@warthog.procyon.org.uk> X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 3.1 on 10.11.54.8 Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org Willem de Bruijn wrote: > No need to modify __sys_sendmmsg explicitly, as it ends up calling > __sys_sendmsg? > > Also, sendpage does this flags masking in the internal sock_FUNC > helpers rather than __sys_FUNC. Might be preferable. I was wondering whether other flags, such as MSG_BATCH should be added to the list. Is it bad if userspace sets that in sendmsg()? AF_KCM, at least, looks at it. David