On Wed, Jul 29, 2026 at 11:37:19AM +0100, Pavel Begunkov wrote:

On 7/29/26 07:59, Christoph Hellwig wrote:

...

The method name feels a bit convoluted, but given all the previous discussions I don't care too strongly. I'll leave the dma-buf side review to those who understand it.

I assume you mean this:

Yes.

• int (*init_dma_buf_io_ctx)(struct file *, struct dma_buf_io_ctx *);

I agree, and all dma_buf_io_[ctx,map] look clunky, but I don't see what I can drop out of the name. Suggestions? Maybe I at least should make the fs op sth like "register_dma_buf".

I just remember scares from the last discussion :)

register_dma_buf sounds fine to be, but unless I misremember there were objections to that before.

-- Pavel Begunkov

---end quoted text---