Hello Peter, thanks for reviewing! On Tue, Sep 28, 2021 at 6:52 PM Peter Xu <pet...@redhat.com> wrote: > > On Fri, Sep 24, 2021 at 06:16:04PM +0100, Daniel P. Berrangé wrote: > > > +ssize_t qio_channel_async_writev(QIOChannel *ioc, > > > + const struct iovec *iov, > > > + size_t niov, > > > + int *fds, > > > + size_t nfds, > > > + Error **errp); > > > > This is missing any flags. We need something like > > > > QIO_CHANNEL_WRITE_FLAG_ZEROCOPY > > > > passed in an 'unsigned int flags' parameter. This in > > turn makes me question whether we should have the > > common helpers at all, as the api is going to be > > different for sync vs async. > > > > The QIOChannelFeature enum probably ought to be > > extended with QIO_CHANNEL_FEATURE_WRITE_ZEROCOPY with > > support for probing whether that's supported or not. > > I'm also wondering whether we could just drop the fds/nfds as per my knowledge > SCM_RIGHT is the only user, at the meantime I don't see why an async interface > would pass in any fd anyways.. Thanks,
FWIW, I think it's a great idea. Daniel, what do you think? > > -- > Peter Xu > Best regards, Leonardo
