On 7/18/25 21:34, Darrick J. Wong wrote: > On Fri, Jul 18, 2025 at 08:07:30PM +0200, Bernd Schubert wrote: >> >>> >>> Please see the two attached patches, which are needed for fuse-io-uring. >>> I can also send them separately, if you prefer. >> >> We (actually Horst) is just testing it as Horst sees failing xfs tests in >> our branch with tmp page removal >> >> Patch 2 needs this addition (might be more, as I didn't test). >> I had it in first, but then split the patch and missed that. > > Aha, I noticed that the flush didn't quite work when uring was enabled. > I don't generally enable uring for testing because I already wrote a lot > of shaky code and uring support is new. Yeah, I can understand. > > Though I'm afraid I have no opinion on this, because I haven't looked > deeply into dev_uring.c. The updates patches in my branch seem to work. Going to post them separately, but with reference to your series tomorrow. Difference is that we cannot call fuse_uring_flush_bg() from flush_bg_queue(), because the latter is also called from fuse_request_end() - result in double lock and even it wouldn't flush over all queues is not desirable. Thanks, Bernd
