Since liburing has been updated to 0.6 it has allowed qemu to be built with io_uring support (it seems that qemu requires at least version 0.3 of liburing to be built).
However not everything is so great.
liburing 0.7 (which has NOT been uploaded to base package) has broken abi compatibility without changing the so number and next version should increment the so number so I'm not sure if version 0.7 should be blacklisted in spec files (as a precautionary measure).
liburing also seems to be built only for x86 and amd64 platforms (ditto in Fedora).
liburing (io_uring to be precise) requires at least Kernel 5.1 so I'm not sure if it is necessary to add "Requires: kernel-default >= 5.1" to the spec file or will it propagate from liburing-devel.
I'm not an expert with spec file syntax so if this is not suitable feel free to correct and improve it if it's not up to standard.
Thanks for the contribution. I agree that we want to enable this feature (not sure how it slipped by me). Your spec file changes are fine. I'm not sure what's going on with limiting arch's its avail on. I'll look into it.
Since liburing has been updated to 0.6 it has allowed qemu to be built with io_uring support (it seems that qemu requires at least version 0.3 of liburing to be built).
However not everything is so great.
liburing 0.7 (which has NOT been uploaded to base package) has broken abi compatibility without changing the so number and next version should increment the so number so I'm not sure if version 0.7 should be blacklisted in spec files (as a precautionary measure).
liburing also seems to be built only for x86 and amd64 platforms (ditto in Fedora).
liburing (io_uring to be precise) requires at least Kernel 5.1 so I'm not sure if it is necessary to add "Requires: kernel-default >= 5.1" to the spec file or will it propagate from liburing-devel.
I'm not an expert with spec file syntax so if this is not suitable feel free to correct and improve it if it's not up to standard.