public inbox for [email protected]
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
* [PATCH 1/3] io_uring: add remote task_work execution helper
  2024-03-28 18:52 [PATCHSET 0/3] Cleanup and improve MSG_RING performance Jens Axboe
@ 2024-03-28 18:52 ` Jens Axboe
  2024-03-29 12:51   ` Pavel Begunkov
  0 siblings, 1 reply; 12+ messages in thread
From: Jens Axboe @ 2024-03-28 18:52 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: io-uring; +Cc: Jens Axboe

All our task_work handling is targeted at the state in the io_kiocb
itself, which is what it is being used for. However, MSG_RING rolls its
own task_work handling, ignoring how that is usually done.

In preparation for switching MSG_RING to be able to use the normal
task_work handling, add io_req_task_work_add_remote() which allows the
caller to pass in the target io_ring_ctx and task.

Signed-off-by: Jens Axboe <[email protected]>
---
 io_uring/io_uring.c | 27 +++++++++++++++++++--------
 io_uring/io_uring.h |  2 ++
 2 files changed, 21 insertions(+), 8 deletions(-)

diff --git a/io_uring/io_uring.c b/io_uring/io_uring.c
index 9978dbe00027..609ff9ea5930 100644
--- a/io_uring/io_uring.c
+++ b/io_uring/io_uring.c
@@ -1241,9 +1241,10 @@ void tctx_task_work(struct callback_head *cb)
 	WARN_ON_ONCE(ret);
 }
 
-static inline void io_req_local_work_add(struct io_kiocb *req, unsigned tw_flags)
+static inline void io_req_local_work_add(struct io_kiocb *req,
+					 struct io_ring_ctx *ctx,
+					 unsigned tw_flags)
 {
-	struct io_ring_ctx *ctx = req->ctx;
 	unsigned nr_wait, nr_tw, nr_tw_prev;
 	unsigned long flags;
 
@@ -1291,9 +1292,10 @@ static inline void io_req_local_work_add(struct io_kiocb *req, unsigned tw_flags
 	wake_up_state(ctx->submitter_task, TASK_INTERRUPTIBLE);
 }
 
-static void io_req_normal_work_add(struct io_kiocb *req)
+static void io_req_normal_work_add(struct io_kiocb *req,
+				   struct task_struct *task)
 {
-	struct io_uring_task *tctx = req->task->io_uring;
+	struct io_uring_task *tctx = task->io_uring;
 	struct io_ring_ctx *ctx = req->ctx;
 	unsigned long flags;
 	bool was_empty;
@@ -1319,7 +1321,7 @@ static void io_req_normal_work_add(struct io_kiocb *req)
 		return;
 	}
 
-	if (likely(!task_work_add(req->task, &tctx->task_work, ctx->notify_method)))
+	if (likely(!task_work_add(task, &tctx->task_work, ctx->notify_method)))
 		return;
 
 	io_fallback_tw(tctx, false);
@@ -1328,9 +1330,18 @@ static void io_req_normal_work_add(struct io_kiocb *req)
 void __io_req_task_work_add(struct io_kiocb *req, unsigned flags)
 {
 	if (req->ctx->flags & IORING_SETUP_DEFER_TASKRUN)
-		io_req_local_work_add(req, flags);
+		io_req_local_work_add(req, req->ctx, flags);
+	else
+		io_req_normal_work_add(req, req->task);
+}
+
+void io_req_task_work_add_remote(struct io_kiocb *req, struct task_struct *task,
+				 struct io_ring_ctx *ctx, unsigned flags)
+{
+	if (req->ctx->flags & IORING_SETUP_DEFER_TASKRUN)
+		io_req_local_work_add(req, ctx, flags);
 	else
-		io_req_normal_work_add(req);
+		io_req_normal_work_add(req, task);
 }
 
 static void __cold io_move_task_work_from_local(struct io_ring_ctx *ctx)
@@ -1349,7 +1360,7 @@ static void __cold io_move_task_work_from_local(struct io_ring_ctx *ctx)
 						    io_task_work.node);
 
 		node = node->next;
-		io_req_normal_work_add(req);
+		io_req_normal_work_add(req, req->task);
 	}
 }
 
diff --git a/io_uring/io_uring.h b/io_uring/io_uring.h
index bde463642c71..a6dec5321ec4 100644
--- a/io_uring/io_uring.h
+++ b/io_uring/io_uring.h
@@ -74,6 +74,8 @@ struct file *io_file_get_fixed(struct io_kiocb *req, int fd,
 			       unsigned issue_flags);
 
 void __io_req_task_work_add(struct io_kiocb *req, unsigned flags);
+void io_req_task_work_add_remote(struct io_kiocb *req, struct task_struct *task,
+				 struct io_ring_ctx *ctx, unsigned flags);
 bool io_alloc_async_data(struct io_kiocb *req);
 void io_req_task_queue(struct io_kiocb *req);
 void io_req_task_complete(struct io_kiocb *req, struct io_tw_state *ts);
-- 
2.43.0


^ permalink raw reply related	[flat|nested] 12+ messages in thread

* Re: [PATCH 1/3] io_uring: add remote task_work execution helper
  2024-03-28 18:52 ` [PATCH 1/3] io_uring: add remote task_work execution helper Jens Axboe
@ 2024-03-29 12:51   ` Pavel Begunkov
  2024-03-29 13:31     ` Jens Axboe
  0 siblings, 1 reply; 12+ messages in thread
From: Pavel Begunkov @ 2024-03-29 12:51 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: Jens Axboe, io-uring

On 3/28/24 18:52, Jens Axboe wrote:
> All our task_work handling is targeted at the state in the io_kiocb
> itself, which is what it is being used for. However, MSG_RING rolls its
> own task_work handling, ignoring how that is usually done.
> 
> In preparation for switching MSG_RING to be able to use the normal
> task_work handling, add io_req_task_work_add_remote() which allows the
> caller to pass in the target io_ring_ctx and task.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Jens Axboe <[email protected]>
> ---
>   io_uring/io_uring.c | 27 +++++++++++++++++++--------
>   io_uring/io_uring.h |  2 ++
>   2 files changed, 21 insertions(+), 8 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/io_uring/io_uring.c b/io_uring/io_uring.c
> index 9978dbe00027..609ff9ea5930 100644
> --- a/io_uring/io_uring.c
> +++ b/io_uring/io_uring.c
> @@ -1241,9 +1241,10 @@ void tctx_task_work(struct callback_head *cb)
>   	WARN_ON_ONCE(ret);
>   }
>   
> -static inline void io_req_local_work_add(struct io_kiocb *req, unsigned tw_flags)
> +static inline void io_req_local_work_add(struct io_kiocb *req,
> +					 struct io_ring_ctx *ctx,
> +					 unsigned tw_flags)
>   {
> -	struct io_ring_ctx *ctx = req->ctx;
>   	unsigned nr_wait, nr_tw, nr_tw_prev;
>   	unsigned long flags;
>   
> @@ -1291,9 +1292,10 @@ static inline void io_req_local_work_add(struct io_kiocb *req, unsigned tw_flags
>   	wake_up_state(ctx->submitter_task, TASK_INTERRUPTIBLE);
>   }
>   
> -static void io_req_normal_work_add(struct io_kiocb *req)
> +static void io_req_normal_work_add(struct io_kiocb *req,
> +				   struct task_struct *task)
>   {
> -	struct io_uring_task *tctx = req->task->io_uring;
> +	struct io_uring_task *tctx = task->io_uring;
>   	struct io_ring_ctx *ctx = req->ctx;
>   	unsigned long flags;
>   	bool was_empty;
> @@ -1319,7 +1321,7 @@ static void io_req_normal_work_add(struct io_kiocb *req)
>   		return;
>   	}
>   
> -	if (likely(!task_work_add(req->task, &tctx->task_work, ctx->notify_method)))
> +	if (likely(!task_work_add(task, &tctx->task_work, ctx->notify_method)))
>   		return;
>   
>   	io_fallback_tw(tctx, false);
> @@ -1328,9 +1330,18 @@ static void io_req_normal_work_add(struct io_kiocb *req)
>   void __io_req_task_work_add(struct io_kiocb *req, unsigned flags)
>   {
>   	if (req->ctx->flags & IORING_SETUP_DEFER_TASKRUN)
> -		io_req_local_work_add(req, flags);
> +		io_req_local_work_add(req, req->ctx, flags);
> +	else
> +		io_req_normal_work_add(req, req->task);
> +}
> +
> +void io_req_task_work_add_remote(struct io_kiocb *req, struct task_struct *task,
> +				 struct io_ring_ctx *ctx, unsigned flags)

Urgh, even the declration screams that there is something wrong
considering it _either_ targets @ctx or @task.

Just pass @ctx, so it either use ctx->submitter_task or
req->task, hmm?

A side note, it's a dangerous game, I told it before. At least
it would've been nice to abuse lockdep in a form of:

io_req_task_complete(req, tw, ctx) {
	lockdep_assert(req->ctx == ctx);
	...
}

but we don't have @ctx there, maybe we'll add it to tw later.


> +{
> +	if (req->ctx->flags & IORING_SETUP_DEFER_TASKRUN)
> +		io_req_local_work_add(req, ctx, flags);
>   	else
> -		io_req_normal_work_add(req);
> +		io_req_normal_work_add(req, task);
>   }
>   
>   static void __cold io_move_task_work_from_local(struct io_ring_ctx *ctx)
> @@ -1349,7 +1360,7 @@ static void __cold io_move_task_work_from_local(struct io_ring_ctx *ctx)
>   						    io_task_work.node);
>   
>   		node = node->next;
> -		io_req_normal_work_add(req);
> +		io_req_normal_work_add(req, req->task);
>   	}
>   }
>   
> diff --git a/io_uring/io_uring.h b/io_uring/io_uring.h
> index bde463642c71..a6dec5321ec4 100644
> --- a/io_uring/io_uring.h
> +++ b/io_uring/io_uring.h
> @@ -74,6 +74,8 @@ struct file *io_file_get_fixed(struct io_kiocb *req, int fd,
>   			       unsigned issue_flags);
>   
>   void __io_req_task_work_add(struct io_kiocb *req, unsigned flags);
> +void io_req_task_work_add_remote(struct io_kiocb *req, struct task_struct *task,
> +				 struct io_ring_ctx *ctx, unsigned flags);
>   bool io_alloc_async_data(struct io_kiocb *req);
>   void io_req_task_queue(struct io_kiocb *req);
>   void io_req_task_complete(struct io_kiocb *req, struct io_tw_state *ts);

-- 
Pavel Begunkov

^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 12+ messages in thread

* Re: [PATCH 1/3] io_uring: add remote task_work execution helper
  2024-03-29 12:51   ` Pavel Begunkov
@ 2024-03-29 13:31     ` Jens Axboe
  2024-03-29 15:50       ` Pavel Begunkov
  0 siblings, 1 reply; 12+ messages in thread
From: Jens Axboe @ 2024-03-29 13:31 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: Pavel Begunkov, io-uring

On 3/29/24 6:51 AM, Pavel Begunkov wrote:
> On 3/28/24 18:52, Jens Axboe wrote:
>> All our task_work handling is targeted at the state in the io_kiocb
>> itself, which is what it is being used for. However, MSG_RING rolls its
>> own task_work handling, ignoring how that is usually done.
>>
>> In preparation for switching MSG_RING to be able to use the normal
>> task_work handling, add io_req_task_work_add_remote() which allows the
>> caller to pass in the target io_ring_ctx and task.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Jens Axboe <[email protected]>
>> ---
>>   io_uring/io_uring.c | 27 +++++++++++++++++++--------
>>   io_uring/io_uring.h |  2 ++
>>   2 files changed, 21 insertions(+), 8 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/io_uring/io_uring.c b/io_uring/io_uring.c
>> index 9978dbe00027..609ff9ea5930 100644
>> --- a/io_uring/io_uring.c
>> +++ b/io_uring/io_uring.c
>> @@ -1241,9 +1241,10 @@ void tctx_task_work(struct callback_head *cb)
>>       WARN_ON_ONCE(ret);
>>   }
>>   -static inline void io_req_local_work_add(struct io_kiocb *req, unsigned tw_flags)
>> +static inline void io_req_local_work_add(struct io_kiocb *req,
>> +                     struct io_ring_ctx *ctx,
>> +                     unsigned tw_flags)
>>   {
>> -    struct io_ring_ctx *ctx = req->ctx;
>>       unsigned nr_wait, nr_tw, nr_tw_prev;
>>       unsigned long flags;
>>   @@ -1291,9 +1292,10 @@ static inline void io_req_local_work_add(struct io_kiocb *req, unsigned tw_flags
>>       wake_up_state(ctx->submitter_task, TASK_INTERRUPTIBLE);
>>   }
>>   -static void io_req_normal_work_add(struct io_kiocb *req)
>> +static void io_req_normal_work_add(struct io_kiocb *req,
>> +                   struct task_struct *task)
>>   {
>> -    struct io_uring_task *tctx = req->task->io_uring;
>> +    struct io_uring_task *tctx = task->io_uring;
>>       struct io_ring_ctx *ctx = req->ctx;
>>       unsigned long flags;
>>       bool was_empty;
>> @@ -1319,7 +1321,7 @@ static void io_req_normal_work_add(struct io_kiocb *req)
>>           return;
>>       }
>>   -    if (likely(!task_work_add(req->task, &tctx->task_work, ctx->notify_method)))
>> +    if (likely(!task_work_add(task, &tctx->task_work, ctx->notify_method)))
>>           return;
>>         io_fallback_tw(tctx, false);
>> @@ -1328,9 +1330,18 @@ static void io_req_normal_work_add(struct io_kiocb *req)
>>   void __io_req_task_work_add(struct io_kiocb *req, unsigned flags)
>>   {
>>       if (req->ctx->flags & IORING_SETUP_DEFER_TASKRUN)
>> -        io_req_local_work_add(req, flags);
>> +        io_req_local_work_add(req, req->ctx, flags);
>> +    else
>> +        io_req_normal_work_add(req, req->task);
>> +}
>> +
>> +void io_req_task_work_add_remote(struct io_kiocb *req, struct task_struct *task,
>> +                 struct io_ring_ctx *ctx, unsigned flags)
> 
> Urgh, even the declration screams that there is something wrong
> considering it _either_ targets @ctx or @task.
> 
> Just pass @ctx, so it either use ctx->submitter_task or
> req->task, hmm?

I actually since changed the above to use a common helper, so was
scratching my head a bit over your comment as it can't really work in
that setup without needing to check for whether ->submitter_task is set
or not. But I do agree this would be nicer, so I'll just return to using
the separate helpers for this and it should fall out nicely. The only
odd caller is the MSG_RING side, so makes sense to have it a bit more
separate rather than try and fold it in with the regular side of using
task_work.

> A side note, it's a dangerous game, I told it before. At least
> it would've been nice to abuse lockdep in a form of:
> 
> io_req_task_complete(req, tw, ctx) {
>     lockdep_assert(req->ctx == ctx);
>     ...
> }
> 
> but we don't have @ctx there, maybe we'll add it to tw later.

Agree, but a separate thing imho.

-- 
Jens Axboe


^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 12+ messages in thread

* Re: [PATCH 1/3] io_uring: add remote task_work execution helper
  2024-03-29 13:31     ` Jens Axboe
@ 2024-03-29 15:50       ` Pavel Begunkov
  2024-03-29 16:10         ` Jens Axboe
  0 siblings, 1 reply; 12+ messages in thread
From: Pavel Begunkov @ 2024-03-29 15:50 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: Jens Axboe, io-uring

On 3/29/24 13:31, Jens Axboe wrote:
> On 3/29/24 6:51 AM, Pavel Begunkov wrote:
>> On 3/28/24 18:52, Jens Axboe wrote:
>>> All our task_work handling is targeted at the state in the io_kiocb
>>> itself, which is what it is being used for. However, MSG_RING rolls its
>>> own task_work handling, ignoring how that is usually done.
>>>
>>> In preparation for switching MSG_RING to be able to use the normal
>>> task_work handling, add io_req_task_work_add_remote() which allows the
>>> caller to pass in the target io_ring_ctx and task.
>>>
>>> Signed-off-by: Jens Axboe <[email protected]>
>>> ---
>>>    io_uring/io_uring.c | 27 +++++++++++++++++++--------
>>>    io_uring/io_uring.h |  2 ++
>>>    2 files changed, 21 insertions(+), 8 deletions(-)
>>>
>>> diff --git a/io_uring/io_uring.c b/io_uring/io_uring.c
>>> index 9978dbe00027..609ff9ea5930 100644
>>> --- a/io_uring/io_uring.c
>>> +++ b/io_uring/io_uring.c
>>> @@ -1241,9 +1241,10 @@ void tctx_task_work(struct callback_head *cb)
>>>        WARN_ON_ONCE(ret);
>>>    }
>>>    -static inline void io_req_local_work_add(struct io_kiocb *req, unsigned tw_flags)
>>> +static inline void io_req_local_work_add(struct io_kiocb *req,
>>> +                     struct io_ring_ctx *ctx,
>>> +                     unsigned tw_flags)
>>>    {
>>> -    struct io_ring_ctx *ctx = req->ctx;
>>>        unsigned nr_wait, nr_tw, nr_tw_prev;
>>>        unsigned long flags;
>>>    @@ -1291,9 +1292,10 @@ static inline void io_req_local_work_add(struct io_kiocb *req, unsigned tw_flags
>>>        wake_up_state(ctx->submitter_task, TASK_INTERRUPTIBLE);
>>>    }
>>>    -static void io_req_normal_work_add(struct io_kiocb *req)
>>> +static void io_req_normal_work_add(struct io_kiocb *req,
>>> +                   struct task_struct *task)
>>>    {
>>> -    struct io_uring_task *tctx = req->task->io_uring;
>>> +    struct io_uring_task *tctx = task->io_uring;
>>>        struct io_ring_ctx *ctx = req->ctx;
>>>        unsigned long flags;
>>>        bool was_empty;
>>> @@ -1319,7 +1321,7 @@ static void io_req_normal_work_add(struct io_kiocb *req)
>>>            return;
>>>        }
>>>    -    if (likely(!task_work_add(req->task, &tctx->task_work, ctx->notify_method)))
>>> +    if (likely(!task_work_add(task, &tctx->task_work, ctx->notify_method)))
>>>            return;
>>>          io_fallback_tw(tctx, false);
>>> @@ -1328,9 +1330,18 @@ static void io_req_normal_work_add(struct io_kiocb *req)
>>>    void __io_req_task_work_add(struct io_kiocb *req, unsigned flags)
>>>    {
>>>        if (req->ctx->flags & IORING_SETUP_DEFER_TASKRUN)
>>> -        io_req_local_work_add(req, flags);
>>> +        io_req_local_work_add(req, req->ctx, flags);
>>> +    else
>>> +        io_req_normal_work_add(req, req->task);
>>> +}
>>> +
>>> +void io_req_task_work_add_remote(struct io_kiocb *req, struct task_struct *task,
>>> +                 struct io_ring_ctx *ctx, unsigned flags)
>>
>> Urgh, even the declration screams that there is something wrong
>> considering it _either_ targets @ctx or @task.
>>
>> Just pass @ctx, so it either use ctx->submitter_task or
>> req->task, hmm?
> 
> I actually since changed the above to use a common helper, so was
> scratching my head a bit over your comment as it can't really work in
> that setup without needing to check for whether ->submitter_task is set
> or not. But I do agree this would be nicer, so I'll just return to using
> the separate helpers for this and it should fall out nicely. The only
> odd caller is the MSG_RING side, so makes sense to have it a bit more
> separate rather than try and fold it in with the regular side of using
> task_work.
> 
>> A side note, it's a dangerous game, I told it before. At least
>> it would've been nice to abuse lockdep in a form of:
>>
>> io_req_task_complete(req, tw, ctx) {
>>      lockdep_assert(req->ctx == ctx);
>>      ...
>> }
>>
>> but we don't have @ctx there, maybe we'll add it to tw later.
> 
> Agree, but a separate thing imho.

It's not in a sense that condition couldn't have happened
before and the patch opening all possibilities.

We actually have @ctx via struct io_tctx_node, so considering
fallback it would probably be:

lockdep_assert(!current->io_uring ||
                current->io_uring->ctx == req->ctx);

-- 
Pavel Begunkov

^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 12+ messages in thread

* Re: [PATCH 1/3] io_uring: add remote task_work execution helper
  2024-03-29 15:50       ` Pavel Begunkov
@ 2024-03-29 16:10         ` Jens Axboe
  0 siblings, 0 replies; 12+ messages in thread
From: Jens Axboe @ 2024-03-29 16:10 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: Pavel Begunkov, io-uring

On 3/29/24 9:50 AM, Pavel Begunkov wrote:
> On 3/29/24 13:31, Jens Axboe wrote:
>> On 3/29/24 6:51 AM, Pavel Begunkov wrote:
>>> On 3/28/24 18:52, Jens Axboe wrote:
>>>> All our task_work handling is targeted at the state in the io_kiocb
>>>> itself, which is what it is being used for. However, MSG_RING rolls its
>>>> own task_work handling, ignoring how that is usually done.
>>>>
>>>> In preparation for switching MSG_RING to be able to use the normal
>>>> task_work handling, add io_req_task_work_add_remote() which allows the
>>>> caller to pass in the target io_ring_ctx and task.
>>>>
>>>> Signed-off-by: Jens Axboe <[email protected]>
>>>> ---
>>>>    io_uring/io_uring.c | 27 +++++++++++++++++++--------
>>>>    io_uring/io_uring.h |  2 ++
>>>>    2 files changed, 21 insertions(+), 8 deletions(-)
>>>>
>>>> diff --git a/io_uring/io_uring.c b/io_uring/io_uring.c
>>>> index 9978dbe00027..609ff9ea5930 100644
>>>> --- a/io_uring/io_uring.c
>>>> +++ b/io_uring/io_uring.c
>>>> @@ -1241,9 +1241,10 @@ void tctx_task_work(struct callback_head *cb)
>>>>        WARN_ON_ONCE(ret);
>>>>    }
>>>>    -static inline void io_req_local_work_add(struct io_kiocb *req, unsigned tw_flags)
>>>> +static inline void io_req_local_work_add(struct io_kiocb *req,
>>>> +                     struct io_ring_ctx *ctx,
>>>> +                     unsigned tw_flags)
>>>>    {
>>>> -    struct io_ring_ctx *ctx = req->ctx;
>>>>        unsigned nr_wait, nr_tw, nr_tw_prev;
>>>>        unsigned long flags;
>>>>    @@ -1291,9 +1292,10 @@ static inline void io_req_local_work_add(struct io_kiocb *req, unsigned tw_flags
>>>>        wake_up_state(ctx->submitter_task, TASK_INTERRUPTIBLE);
>>>>    }
>>>>    -static void io_req_normal_work_add(struct io_kiocb *req)
>>>> +static void io_req_normal_work_add(struct io_kiocb *req,
>>>> +                   struct task_struct *task)
>>>>    {
>>>> -    struct io_uring_task *tctx = req->task->io_uring;
>>>> +    struct io_uring_task *tctx = task->io_uring;
>>>>        struct io_ring_ctx *ctx = req->ctx;
>>>>        unsigned long flags;
>>>>        bool was_empty;
>>>> @@ -1319,7 +1321,7 @@ static void io_req_normal_work_add(struct io_kiocb *req)
>>>>            return;
>>>>        }
>>>>    -    if (likely(!task_work_add(req->task, &tctx->task_work, ctx->notify_method)))
>>>> +    if (likely(!task_work_add(task, &tctx->task_work, ctx->notify_method)))
>>>>            return;
>>>>          io_fallback_tw(tctx, false);
>>>> @@ -1328,9 +1330,18 @@ static void io_req_normal_work_add(struct io_kiocb *req)
>>>>    void __io_req_task_work_add(struct io_kiocb *req, unsigned flags)
>>>>    {
>>>>        if (req->ctx->flags & IORING_SETUP_DEFER_TASKRUN)
>>>> -        io_req_local_work_add(req, flags);
>>>> +        io_req_local_work_add(req, req->ctx, flags);
>>>> +    else
>>>> +        io_req_normal_work_add(req, req->task);
>>>> +}
>>>> +
>>>> +void io_req_task_work_add_remote(struct io_kiocb *req, struct task_struct *task,
>>>> +                 struct io_ring_ctx *ctx, unsigned flags)
>>>
>>> Urgh, even the declration screams that there is something wrong
>>> considering it _either_ targets @ctx or @task.
>>>
>>> Just pass @ctx, so it either use ctx->submitter_task or
>>> req->task, hmm?
>>
>> I actually since changed the above to use a common helper, so was
>> scratching my head a bit over your comment as it can't really work in
>> that setup without needing to check for whether ->submitter_task is set
>> or not. But I do agree this would be nicer, so I'll just return to using
>> the separate helpers for this and it should fall out nicely. The only
>> odd caller is the MSG_RING side, so makes sense to have it a bit more
>> separate rather than try and fold it in with the regular side of using
>> task_work.
>>
>>> A side note, it's a dangerous game, I told it before. At least
>>> it would've been nice to abuse lockdep in a form of:
>>>
>>> io_req_task_complete(req, tw, ctx) {
>>>      lockdep_assert(req->ctx == ctx);
>>>      ...
>>> }
>>>
>>> but we don't have @ctx there, maybe we'll add it to tw later.
>>
>> Agree, but a separate thing imho.
> 
> It's not in a sense that condition couldn't have happened
> before and the patch opening all possibilities.
> 
> We actually have @ctx via struct io_tctx_node, so considering
> fallback it would probably be:
> 
> lockdep_assert(!current->io_uring ||
>                current->io_uring->ctx == req->ctx);

That's not a bad idea. I did run all the testing verifying the ctx, and
it all appears fine. But adding the check is a good idea in general.
Want to send it?

-- 
Jens Axboe


^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 12+ messages in thread

* [PATCHSET v2 0/3] Cleanup and improve MSG_RING performance
@ 2024-03-29 20:09 Jens Axboe
  2024-03-29 20:09 ` [PATCH 1/3] io_uring: add remote task_work execution helper Jens Axboe
                   ` (2 more replies)
  0 siblings, 3 replies; 12+ messages in thread
From: Jens Axboe @ 2024-03-29 20:09 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: io-uring

Hi,

MSG_RING rolls its own task_work handling, which there's really no need
for. Rather, it should use the generic io_uring infrastructure for this.

Add a helper for remote execution, and switch over MSG_RING to use it.
This both cleans up the code, and improves performance of this opcode
considerably.

Changes since v1:
- Only pass in ctx, not both ctx and task (Pavel)
- Fix io_req_task_work_add_remote() not using passed in 'ctx' for
  flags check
- Get rid of unneeded references on the io_kiocb

 io_uring/io_uring.c | 30 ++++++++++++++++++++++--------
 io_uring/io_uring.h |  2 ++
 io_uring/msg_ring.c | 34 ++++++++++------------------------
 3 files changed, 34 insertions(+), 32 deletions(-)

-- 
Jens Axboe


^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 12+ messages in thread

* [PATCH 1/3] io_uring: add remote task_work execution helper
  2024-03-29 20:09 [PATCHSET v2 0/3] Cleanup and improve MSG_RING performance Jens Axboe
@ 2024-03-29 20:09 ` Jens Axboe
  2024-04-01 17:30   ` David Wei
  2024-03-29 20:09 ` [PATCH 2/3] io_uring/msg_ring: cleanup posting to IOPOLL vs !IOPOLL ring Jens Axboe
  2024-03-29 20:09 ` [PATCH 3/3] io_uring/msg_ring: improve handling of target CQE posting Jens Axboe
  2 siblings, 1 reply; 12+ messages in thread
From: Jens Axboe @ 2024-03-29 20:09 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: io-uring; +Cc: Jens Axboe

All our task_work handling is targeted at the state in the io_kiocb
itself, which is what it is being used for. However, MSG_RING rolls its
own task_work handling, ignoring how that is usually done.

In preparation for switching MSG_RING to be able to use the normal
task_work handling, add io_req_task_work_add_remote() which allows the
caller to pass in the target io_ring_ctx.

Signed-off-by: Jens Axboe <[email protected]>
---
 io_uring/io_uring.c | 30 ++++++++++++++++++++++--------
 io_uring/io_uring.h |  2 ++
 2 files changed, 24 insertions(+), 8 deletions(-)

diff --git a/io_uring/io_uring.c b/io_uring/io_uring.c
index fddaefb9cbff..a311a244914b 100644
--- a/io_uring/io_uring.c
+++ b/io_uring/io_uring.c
@@ -1232,9 +1232,10 @@ void tctx_task_work(struct callback_head *cb)
 	WARN_ON_ONCE(ret);
 }
 
-static inline void io_req_local_work_add(struct io_kiocb *req, unsigned flags)
+static inline void io_req_local_work_add(struct io_kiocb *req,
+					 struct io_ring_ctx *ctx,
+					 unsigned flags)
 {
-	struct io_ring_ctx *ctx = req->ctx;
 	unsigned nr_wait, nr_tw, nr_tw_prev;
 	struct llist_node *head;
 
@@ -1300,9 +1301,10 @@ static inline void io_req_local_work_add(struct io_kiocb *req, unsigned flags)
 	wake_up_state(ctx->submitter_task, TASK_INTERRUPTIBLE);
 }
 
-static void io_req_normal_work_add(struct io_kiocb *req)
+static void io_req_normal_work_add(struct io_kiocb *req,
+				   struct task_struct *task)
 {
-	struct io_uring_task *tctx = req->task->io_uring;
+	struct io_uring_task *tctx = task->io_uring;
 	struct io_ring_ctx *ctx = req->ctx;
 
 	/* task_work already pending, we're done */
@@ -1321,7 +1323,7 @@ static void io_req_normal_work_add(struct io_kiocb *req)
 		return;
 	}
 
-	if (likely(!task_work_add(req->task, &tctx->task_work, ctx->notify_method)))
+	if (likely(!task_work_add(task, &tctx->task_work, ctx->notify_method)))
 		return;
 
 	io_fallback_tw(tctx, false);
@@ -1331,10 +1333,22 @@ void __io_req_task_work_add(struct io_kiocb *req, unsigned flags)
 {
 	if (req->ctx->flags & IORING_SETUP_DEFER_TASKRUN) {
 		rcu_read_lock();
-		io_req_local_work_add(req, flags);
+		io_req_local_work_add(req, req->ctx, flags);
+		rcu_read_unlock();
+	} else {
+		io_req_normal_work_add(req, req->task);
+	}
+}
+
+void io_req_task_work_add_remote(struct io_kiocb *req, struct io_ring_ctx *ctx,
+				 unsigned flags)
+{
+	if (ctx->flags & IORING_SETUP_DEFER_TASKRUN) {
+		rcu_read_lock();
+		io_req_local_work_add(req, ctx, flags);
 		rcu_read_unlock();
 	} else {
-		io_req_normal_work_add(req);
+		io_req_normal_work_add(req, READ_ONCE(ctx->submitter_task));
 	}
 }
 
@@ -1348,7 +1362,7 @@ static void __cold io_move_task_work_from_local(struct io_ring_ctx *ctx)
 						    io_task_work.node);
 
 		node = node->next;
-		io_req_normal_work_add(req);
+		io_req_normal_work_add(req, req->task);
 	}
 }
 
diff --git a/io_uring/io_uring.h b/io_uring/io_uring.h
index 1eb65324792a..4155379ee586 100644
--- a/io_uring/io_uring.h
+++ b/io_uring/io_uring.h
@@ -74,6 +74,8 @@ struct file *io_file_get_fixed(struct io_kiocb *req, int fd,
 			       unsigned issue_flags);
 
 void __io_req_task_work_add(struct io_kiocb *req, unsigned flags);
+void io_req_task_work_add_remote(struct io_kiocb *req, struct io_ring_ctx *ctx,
+				 unsigned flags);
 bool io_alloc_async_data(struct io_kiocb *req);
 void io_req_task_queue(struct io_kiocb *req);
 void io_req_task_complete(struct io_kiocb *req, struct io_tw_state *ts);
-- 
2.43.0


^ permalink raw reply related	[flat|nested] 12+ messages in thread

* [PATCH 2/3] io_uring/msg_ring: cleanup posting to IOPOLL vs !IOPOLL ring
  2024-03-29 20:09 [PATCHSET v2 0/3] Cleanup and improve MSG_RING performance Jens Axboe
  2024-03-29 20:09 ` [PATCH 1/3] io_uring: add remote task_work execution helper Jens Axboe
@ 2024-03-29 20:09 ` Jens Axboe
  2024-03-29 20:09 ` [PATCH 3/3] io_uring/msg_ring: improve handling of target CQE posting Jens Axboe
  2 siblings, 0 replies; 12+ messages in thread
From: Jens Axboe @ 2024-03-29 20:09 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: io-uring; +Cc: Jens Axboe

Move the posting outside the checking and locking, it's cleaner that
way.

Signed-off-by: Jens Axboe <[email protected]>
---
 io_uring/msg_ring.c | 10 ++++------
 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-)

diff --git a/io_uring/msg_ring.c b/io_uring/msg_ring.c
index cd6dcf634ba3..d1f66a40b4b4 100644
--- a/io_uring/msg_ring.c
+++ b/io_uring/msg_ring.c
@@ -147,13 +147,11 @@ static int io_msg_ring_data(struct io_kiocb *req, unsigned int issue_flags)
 	if (target_ctx->flags & IORING_SETUP_IOPOLL) {
 		if (unlikely(io_double_lock_ctx(target_ctx, issue_flags)))
 			return -EAGAIN;
-		if (io_post_aux_cqe(target_ctx, msg->user_data, msg->len, flags))
-			ret = 0;
-		io_double_unlock_ctx(target_ctx);
-	} else {
-		if (io_post_aux_cqe(target_ctx, msg->user_data, msg->len, flags))
-			ret = 0;
 	}
+	if (io_post_aux_cqe(target_ctx, msg->user_data, msg->len, flags))
+		ret = 0;
+	if (target_ctx->flags & IORING_SETUP_IOPOLL)
+		io_double_unlock_ctx(target_ctx);
 	return ret;
 }
 
-- 
2.43.0


^ permalink raw reply related	[flat|nested] 12+ messages in thread

* [PATCH 3/3] io_uring/msg_ring: improve handling of target CQE posting
  2024-03-29 20:09 [PATCHSET v2 0/3] Cleanup and improve MSG_RING performance Jens Axboe
  2024-03-29 20:09 ` [PATCH 1/3] io_uring: add remote task_work execution helper Jens Axboe
  2024-03-29 20:09 ` [PATCH 2/3] io_uring/msg_ring: cleanup posting to IOPOLL vs !IOPOLL ring Jens Axboe
@ 2024-03-29 20:09 ` Jens Axboe
  2024-04-01 17:57   ` David Wei
  2 siblings, 1 reply; 12+ messages in thread
From: Jens Axboe @ 2024-03-29 20:09 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: io-uring; +Cc: Jens Axboe

Use the exported helper for queueing task_work, rather than rolling our
own.

This improves peak performance of message passing by about 5x in some
basic testing, with 2 threads just sending messages to each other.
Before this change, it was capped at around 700K/sec, with the change
it's at over 4M/sec.

Signed-off-by: Jens Axboe <[email protected]>
---
 io_uring/msg_ring.c | 24 ++++++------------------
 1 file changed, 6 insertions(+), 18 deletions(-)

diff --git a/io_uring/msg_ring.c b/io_uring/msg_ring.c
index d1f66a40b4b4..af8a5f2947b7 100644
--- a/io_uring/msg_ring.c
+++ b/io_uring/msg_ring.c
@@ -13,7 +13,6 @@
 #include "filetable.h"
 #include "msg_ring.h"
 
-
 /* All valid masks for MSG_RING */
 #define IORING_MSG_RING_MASK		(IORING_MSG_RING_CQE_SKIP | \
 					IORING_MSG_RING_FLAGS_PASS)
@@ -21,7 +20,6 @@
 struct io_msg {
 	struct file			*file;
 	struct file			*src_file;
-	struct callback_head		tw;
 	u64 user_data;
 	u32 len;
 	u32 cmd;
@@ -73,26 +71,18 @@ static inline bool io_msg_need_remote(struct io_ring_ctx *target_ctx)
 	return current != target_ctx->submitter_task;
 }
 
-static int io_msg_exec_remote(struct io_kiocb *req, task_work_func_t func)
+static int io_msg_exec_remote(struct io_kiocb *req, io_req_tw_func_t func)
 {
 	struct io_ring_ctx *ctx = req->file->private_data;
-	struct io_msg *msg = io_kiocb_to_cmd(req, struct io_msg);
-	struct task_struct *task = READ_ONCE(ctx->submitter_task);
-
-	if (unlikely(!task))
-		return -EOWNERDEAD;
-
-	init_task_work(&msg->tw, func);
-	if (task_work_add(ctx->submitter_task, &msg->tw, TWA_SIGNAL))
-		return -EOWNERDEAD;
 
+	req->io_task_work.func = func;
+	io_req_task_work_add_remote(req, ctx, IOU_F_TWQ_LAZY_WAKE);
 	return IOU_ISSUE_SKIP_COMPLETE;
 }
 
-static void io_msg_tw_complete(struct callback_head *head)
+static void io_msg_tw_complete(struct io_kiocb *req, struct io_tw_state *ts)
 {
-	struct io_msg *msg = container_of(head, struct io_msg, tw);
-	struct io_kiocb *req = cmd_to_io_kiocb(msg);
+	struct io_msg *msg = io_kiocb_to_cmd(req, struct io_msg);
 	struct io_ring_ctx *target_ctx = req->file->private_data;
 	int ret = 0;
 
@@ -205,10 +195,8 @@ static int io_msg_install_complete(struct io_kiocb *req, unsigned int issue_flag
 	return ret;
 }
 
-static void io_msg_tw_fd_complete(struct callback_head *head)
+static void io_msg_tw_fd_complete(struct io_kiocb *req, struct io_tw_state *ts)
 {
-	struct io_msg *msg = container_of(head, struct io_msg, tw);
-	struct io_kiocb *req = cmd_to_io_kiocb(msg);
 	int ret = -EOWNERDEAD;
 
 	if (!(current->flags & PF_EXITING))
-- 
2.43.0


^ permalink raw reply related	[flat|nested] 12+ messages in thread

* Re: [PATCH 1/3] io_uring: add remote task_work execution helper
  2024-03-29 20:09 ` [PATCH 1/3] io_uring: add remote task_work execution helper Jens Axboe
@ 2024-04-01 17:30   ` David Wei
  2024-04-01 18:02     ` Jens Axboe
  0 siblings, 1 reply; 12+ messages in thread
From: David Wei @ 2024-04-01 17:30 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: Jens Axboe, io-uring

On 2024-03-29 13:09, Jens Axboe wrote:
> All our task_work handling is targeted at the state in the io_kiocb
> itself, which is what it is being used for. However, MSG_RING rolls its
> own task_work handling, ignoring how that is usually done.
> 
> In preparation for switching MSG_RING to be able to use the normal
> task_work handling, add io_req_task_work_add_remote() which allows the
> caller to pass in the target io_ring_ctx.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Jens Axboe <[email protected]>
> ---
>  io_uring/io_uring.c | 30 ++++++++++++++++++++++--------
>  io_uring/io_uring.h |  2 ++
>  2 files changed, 24 insertions(+), 8 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/io_uring/io_uring.c b/io_uring/io_uring.c
> index fddaefb9cbff..a311a244914b 100644
> --- a/io_uring/io_uring.c
> +++ b/io_uring/io_uring.c
> @@ -1232,9 +1232,10 @@ void tctx_task_work(struct callback_head *cb)
>  	WARN_ON_ONCE(ret);
>  }
>  
> -static inline void io_req_local_work_add(struct io_kiocb *req, unsigned flags)
> +static inline void io_req_local_work_add(struct io_kiocb *req,
> +					 struct io_ring_ctx *ctx,
> +					 unsigned flags)
>  {
> -	struct io_ring_ctx *ctx = req->ctx;
>  	unsigned nr_wait, nr_tw, nr_tw_prev;
>  	struct llist_node *head;
>  
> @@ -1300,9 +1301,10 @@ static inline void io_req_local_work_add(struct io_kiocb *req, unsigned flags)
>  	wake_up_state(ctx->submitter_task, TASK_INTERRUPTIBLE);
>  }
>  
> -static void io_req_normal_work_add(struct io_kiocb *req)
> +static void io_req_normal_work_add(struct io_kiocb *req,
> +				   struct task_struct *task)
>  {
> -	struct io_uring_task *tctx = req->task->io_uring;
> +	struct io_uring_task *tctx = task->io_uring;
>  	struct io_ring_ctx *ctx = req->ctx;
>  
>  	/* task_work already pending, we're done */
> @@ -1321,7 +1323,7 @@ static void io_req_normal_work_add(struct io_kiocb *req)
>  		return;
>  	}
>  
> -	if (likely(!task_work_add(req->task, &tctx->task_work, ctx->notify_method)))
> +	if (likely(!task_work_add(task, &tctx->task_work, ctx->notify_method)))
>  		return;
>  
>  	io_fallback_tw(tctx, false);
> @@ -1331,10 +1333,22 @@ void __io_req_task_work_add(struct io_kiocb *req, unsigned flags)
>  {
>  	if (req->ctx->flags & IORING_SETUP_DEFER_TASKRUN) {
>  		rcu_read_lock();
> -		io_req_local_work_add(req, flags);
> +		io_req_local_work_add(req, req->ctx, flags);
> +		rcu_read_unlock();
> +	} else {
> +		io_req_normal_work_add(req, req->task);

Why does this not require a READ_ONCE() like
io_req_task_work_add_remote()?

> +	}
> +}
> +
> +void io_req_task_work_add_remote(struct io_kiocb *req, struct io_ring_ctx *ctx,
> +				 unsigned flags)
> +{
> +	if (ctx->flags & IORING_SETUP_DEFER_TASKRUN) {
> +		rcu_read_lock();
> +		io_req_local_work_add(req, ctx, flags);
>  		rcu_read_unlock();
>  	} else {
> -		io_req_normal_work_add(req);
> +		io_req_normal_work_add(req, READ_ONCE(ctx->submitter_task));
>  	}
>  }
>  
> @@ -1348,7 +1362,7 @@ static void __cold io_move_task_work_from_local(struct io_ring_ctx *ctx)
>  						    io_task_work.node);
>  
>  		node = node->next;
> -		io_req_normal_work_add(req);
> +		io_req_normal_work_add(req, req->task);
>  	}
>  }
>  
> diff --git a/io_uring/io_uring.h b/io_uring/io_uring.h
> index 1eb65324792a..4155379ee586 100644
> --- a/io_uring/io_uring.h
> +++ b/io_uring/io_uring.h
> @@ -74,6 +74,8 @@ struct file *io_file_get_fixed(struct io_kiocb *req, int fd,
>  			       unsigned issue_flags);
>  
>  void __io_req_task_work_add(struct io_kiocb *req, unsigned flags);
> +void io_req_task_work_add_remote(struct io_kiocb *req, struct io_ring_ctx *ctx,
> +				 unsigned flags);
>  bool io_alloc_async_data(struct io_kiocb *req);
>  void io_req_task_queue(struct io_kiocb *req);
>  void io_req_task_complete(struct io_kiocb *req, struct io_tw_state *ts);

^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 12+ messages in thread

* Re: [PATCH 3/3] io_uring/msg_ring: improve handling of target CQE posting
  2024-03-29 20:09 ` [PATCH 3/3] io_uring/msg_ring: improve handling of target CQE posting Jens Axboe
@ 2024-04-01 17:57   ` David Wei
  0 siblings, 0 replies; 12+ messages in thread
From: David Wei @ 2024-04-01 17:57 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: Jens Axboe, io-uring

On 2024-03-29 13:09, Jens Axboe wrote:
> Use the exported helper for queueing task_work, rather than rolling our
> own.
> 
> This improves peak performance of message passing by about 5x in some
> basic testing, with 2 threads just sending messages to each other.
> Before this change, it was capped at around 700K/sec, with the change
> it's at over 4M/sec.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Jens Axboe <[email protected]>
> ---
>  io_uring/msg_ring.c | 24 ++++++------------------
>  1 file changed, 6 insertions(+), 18 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/io_uring/msg_ring.c b/io_uring/msg_ring.c
> index d1f66a40b4b4..af8a5f2947b7 100644
> --- a/io_uring/msg_ring.c
> +++ b/io_uring/msg_ring.c
> @@ -13,7 +13,6 @@
>  #include "filetable.h"
>  #include "msg_ring.h"
>  
> -
>  /* All valid masks for MSG_RING */
>  #define IORING_MSG_RING_MASK		(IORING_MSG_RING_CQE_SKIP | \
>  					IORING_MSG_RING_FLAGS_PASS)
> @@ -21,7 +20,6 @@
>  struct io_msg {
>  	struct file			*file;
>  	struct file			*src_file;
> -	struct callback_head		tw;
>  	u64 user_data;
>  	u32 len;
>  	u32 cmd;
> @@ -73,26 +71,18 @@ static inline bool io_msg_need_remote(struct io_ring_ctx *target_ctx)
>  	return current != target_ctx->submitter_task;
>  }
>  
> -static int io_msg_exec_remote(struct io_kiocb *req, task_work_func_t func)
> +static int io_msg_exec_remote(struct io_kiocb *req, io_req_tw_func_t func)
>  {
>  	struct io_ring_ctx *ctx = req->file->private_data;
> -	struct io_msg *msg = io_kiocb_to_cmd(req, struct io_msg);
> -	struct task_struct *task = READ_ONCE(ctx->submitter_task);
> -
> -	if (unlikely(!task))
> -		return -EOWNERDEAD;
> -
> -	init_task_work(&msg->tw, func);
> -	if (task_work_add(ctx->submitter_task, &msg->tw, TWA_SIGNAL))
> -		return -EOWNERDEAD;
>  
> +	req->io_task_work.func = func;
> +	io_req_task_work_add_remote(req, ctx, IOU_F_TWQ_LAZY_WAKE);
>  	return IOU_ISSUE_SKIP_COMPLETE;
>  }

This part looks correct. Now with io_req_task_work_add_remote(),
req->io_task_work.func is added to tctx->task_list, and queued up for
execution on the remote ctx->submitter_task via task_work_add(). The end
result is that the argument @func is executed on the remote
ctx->submitter_task, which is the same outcome as before.

Also, unsure how this hand rolled code interacted with defer taskrun
before but now it is handled properly in io_req_task_work_add_remote().

>  
> -static void io_msg_tw_complete(struct callback_head *head)
> +static void io_msg_tw_complete(struct io_kiocb *req, struct io_tw_state *ts)
>  {
> -	struct io_msg *msg = container_of(head, struct io_msg, tw);
> -	struct io_kiocb *req = cmd_to_io_kiocb(msg);
> +	struct io_msg *msg = io_kiocb_to_cmd(req, struct io_msg);
>  	struct io_ring_ctx *target_ctx = req->file->private_data;
>  	int ret = 0;
>  
> @@ -205,10 +195,8 @@ static int io_msg_install_complete(struct io_kiocb *req, unsigned int issue_flag
>  	return ret;
>  }
>  
> -static void io_msg_tw_fd_complete(struct callback_head *head)
> +static void io_msg_tw_fd_complete(struct io_kiocb *req, struct io_tw_state *ts)
>  {
> -	struct io_msg *msg = container_of(head, struct io_msg, tw);
> -	struct io_kiocb *req = cmd_to_io_kiocb(msg);
>  	int ret = -EOWNERDEAD;
>  
>  	if (!(current->flags & PF_EXITING))

^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 12+ messages in thread

* Re: [PATCH 1/3] io_uring: add remote task_work execution helper
  2024-04-01 17:30   ` David Wei
@ 2024-04-01 18:02     ` Jens Axboe
  0 siblings, 0 replies; 12+ messages in thread
From: Jens Axboe @ 2024-04-01 18:02 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: David Wei, io-uring

On 4/1/24 11:30 AM, David Wei wrote:
> On 2024-03-29 13:09, Jens Axboe wrote:
>> All our task_work handling is targeted at the state in the io_kiocb
>> itself, which is what it is being used for. However, MSG_RING rolls its
>> own task_work handling, ignoring how that is usually done.
>>
>> In preparation for switching MSG_RING to be able to use the normal
>> task_work handling, add io_req_task_work_add_remote() which allows the
>> caller to pass in the target io_ring_ctx.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Jens Axboe <[email protected]>
>> ---
>>  io_uring/io_uring.c | 30 ++++++++++++++++++++++--------
>>  io_uring/io_uring.h |  2 ++
>>  2 files changed, 24 insertions(+), 8 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/io_uring/io_uring.c b/io_uring/io_uring.c
>> index fddaefb9cbff..a311a244914b 100644
>> --- a/io_uring/io_uring.c
>> +++ b/io_uring/io_uring.c
>> @@ -1232,9 +1232,10 @@ void tctx_task_work(struct callback_head *cb)
>>  	WARN_ON_ONCE(ret);
>>  }
>>  
>> -static inline void io_req_local_work_add(struct io_kiocb *req, unsigned flags)
>> +static inline void io_req_local_work_add(struct io_kiocb *req,
>> +					 struct io_ring_ctx *ctx,
>> +					 unsigned flags)
>>  {
>> -	struct io_ring_ctx *ctx = req->ctx;
>>  	unsigned nr_wait, nr_tw, nr_tw_prev;
>>  	struct llist_node *head;
>>  
>> @@ -1300,9 +1301,10 @@ static inline void io_req_local_work_add(struct io_kiocb *req, unsigned flags)
>>  	wake_up_state(ctx->submitter_task, TASK_INTERRUPTIBLE);
>>  }
>>  
>> -static void io_req_normal_work_add(struct io_kiocb *req)
>> +static void io_req_normal_work_add(struct io_kiocb *req,
>> +				   struct task_struct *task)
>>  {
>> -	struct io_uring_task *tctx = req->task->io_uring;
>> +	struct io_uring_task *tctx = task->io_uring;
>>  	struct io_ring_ctx *ctx = req->ctx;
>>  
>>  	/* task_work already pending, we're done */
>> @@ -1321,7 +1323,7 @@ static void io_req_normal_work_add(struct io_kiocb *req)
>>  		return;
>>  	}
>>  
>> -	if (likely(!task_work_add(req->task, &tctx->task_work, ctx->notify_method)))
>> +	if (likely(!task_work_add(task, &tctx->task_work, ctx->notify_method)))
>>  		return;
>>  
>>  	io_fallback_tw(tctx, false);
>> @@ -1331,10 +1333,22 @@ void __io_req_task_work_add(struct io_kiocb *req, unsigned flags)
>>  {
>>  	if (req->ctx->flags & IORING_SETUP_DEFER_TASKRUN) {
>>  		rcu_read_lock();
>> -		io_req_local_work_add(req, flags);
>> +		io_req_local_work_add(req, req->ctx, flags);
>> +		rcu_read_unlock();
>> +	} else {
>> +		io_req_normal_work_add(req, req->task);
> 
> Why does this not require a READ_ONCE() like
> io_req_task_work_add_remote()?

One is the req->task side, which is serialized as it's setup at install
time. For the ctx submitter_task, in _theory_ that isn't, hence
read/write once must be used for those. In practice, I don't think the
latter solves anything outside of perhaps KCSAN complaining.

-- 
Jens Axboe


^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 12+ messages in thread

end of thread, other threads:[~2024-04-01 18:02 UTC | newest]

Thread overview: 12+ messages (download: mbox.gz follow: Atom feed
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2024-03-29 20:09 [PATCHSET v2 0/3] Cleanup and improve MSG_RING performance Jens Axboe
2024-03-29 20:09 ` [PATCH 1/3] io_uring: add remote task_work execution helper Jens Axboe
2024-04-01 17:30   ` David Wei
2024-04-01 18:02     ` Jens Axboe
2024-03-29 20:09 ` [PATCH 2/3] io_uring/msg_ring: cleanup posting to IOPOLL vs !IOPOLL ring Jens Axboe
2024-03-29 20:09 ` [PATCH 3/3] io_uring/msg_ring: improve handling of target CQE posting Jens Axboe
2024-04-01 17:57   ` David Wei
  -- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2024-03-28 18:52 [PATCHSET 0/3] Cleanup and improve MSG_RING performance Jens Axboe
2024-03-28 18:52 ` [PATCH 1/3] io_uring: add remote task_work execution helper Jens Axboe
2024-03-29 12:51   ` Pavel Begunkov
2024-03-29 13:31     ` Jens Axboe
2024-03-29 15:50       ` Pavel Begunkov
2024-03-29 16:10         ` Jens Axboe

This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox