public inbox for [email protected]
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Pavel Begunkov <[email protected]>
To: Jens Axboe <[email protected]>, [email protected]
Cc: [email protected]
Subject: Re: [PATCHSET 0/6] Enable NO_OFFLOAD support
Date: Thu, 20 Apr 2023 01:43:35 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <[email protected]> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <[email protected]>

On 4/19/23 17:25, Jens Axboe wrote:
> Hi,
> 
> This series enables support for forcing no-offload for requests that
> otherwise would have been punted to io-wq. In essence, it bypasses
> the normal non-blocking issue in favor of just letting the issue block.
> This is only done for requests that would've otherwise hit io-wq in
> the offload path, anything pollable will still be doing non-blocking
> issue. See patch 3 for details.

That's shooting ourselves in the leg.

1) It has never been easier to lock up userspace. They might be able
to deal with simple cases like read(pipe) + write(pipe), though even
that in a complex enough framework would cause debugging and associated
headache.

Now let's assume that the userspace submits nvme passthrough requests,
it exhausts tags and a request is left waiting there. To progress
forward one of the previous reqs should complete, but it's only putting
task in tw, which will never be run with DEFER_TASKRUN.

It's not enough for the userspace to be careful, for DEFER_TASKRUN
there will always be a chance to get locked .

2) It's not limited only to requests we're submitting, but also
already queued async requests. Inline submission holds uring_lock,
and so if io-wq thread needs to grab a registered file for the
request, it'll io_ring_submit_lock() and wait until the submission
ends. Same for provided buffers and some other cases.

Even task exit will actively try to grab the lock.

-- 
Pavel Begunkov

  parent reply	other threads:[~2023-04-20  0:46 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 15+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2023-04-19 16:25 [PATCHSET 0/6] Enable NO_OFFLOAD support Jens Axboe
2023-04-19 16:25 ` [PATCH 1/6] io_uring: grow struct io_kiocb 'flags' to a 64-bit value Jens Axboe
2023-04-19 16:25 ` [PATCH 2/6] io_uring: move poll_refs up a cacheline to fill a hole Jens Axboe
2023-04-20  0:50   ` Pavel Begunkov
2023-04-19 16:25 ` [PATCH 3/6] io_uring: add support for NO_OFFLOAD Jens Axboe
2023-04-20  1:01   ` Pavel Begunkov
2023-04-20 15:03     ` Jens Axboe
2023-04-20 15:16       ` Pavel Begunkov
2023-04-20 15:56         ` Jens Axboe
2023-04-19 16:25 ` [PATCH 4/6] Revert "io_uring: always go async for unsupported fadvise flags" Jens Axboe
2023-04-19 16:25 ` [PATCH 5/6] Revert "io_uring: for requests that require async, force it" Jens Axboe
2023-04-19 16:25 ` [PATCH 6/6] io_uring: mark opcodes that always need io-wq punt Jens Axboe
2023-04-20  0:43 ` Pavel Begunkov [this message]
2023-04-20 15:08   ` [PATCHSET 0/6] Enable NO_OFFLOAD support Jens Axboe
2023-04-20 15:28     ` Pavel Begunkov

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    [email protected] \
    [email protected] \
    [email protected] \
    [email protected] \
    [email protected] \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox