* [PATCH v2 0/3] cancel_hash per entry lock
@ 2022-06-06 6:57 Hao Xu
2022-06-06 6:57 ` [PATCH 1/3] io_uring: add hash_index and its logic to track req in cancel_hash Hao Xu
` (3 more replies)
0 siblings, 4 replies; 11+ messages in thread
From: Hao Xu @ 2022-06-06 6:57 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: io-uring; +Cc: Jens Axboe, Pavel Begunkov
From: Hao Xu <[email protected]>
Make per entry lock for cancel_hash array, this reduces usage of
completion_lock and contension between cancel_hash entries.
v1->v2:
- Add per entry lock for poll/apoll task work code which was missed
in v1
- add an member in io_kiocb to track req's indice in cancel_hash
Hao Xu (3):
io_uring: add hash_index and its logic to track req in cancel_hash
io_uring: add an io_hash_bucket structure for smaller granularity lock
io_uring: switch cancel_hash to use per list spinlock
io_uring/cancel.c | 15 +++++++--
io_uring/cancel.h | 6 ++++
io_uring/fdinfo.c | 9 ++++--
io_uring/io_uring.c | 8 +++--
io_uring/io_uring_types.h | 3 +-
io_uring/poll.c | 64 +++++++++++++++++++++------------------
6 files changed, 67 insertions(+), 38 deletions(-)
base-commit: d8271bf021438f468dab3cd84fe5279b5bbcead8
--
2.25.1
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 11+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 1/3] io_uring: add hash_index and its logic to track req in cancel_hash
2022-06-06 6:57 [PATCH v2 0/3] cancel_hash per entry lock Hao Xu
@ 2022-06-06 6:57 ` Hao Xu
2022-06-06 11:59 ` Pavel Begunkov
2022-06-06 6:57 ` [PATCH 2/3] io_uring: add an io_hash_bucket structure for smaller granularity lock Hao Xu
` (2 subsequent siblings)
3 siblings, 1 reply; 11+ messages in thread
From: Hao Xu @ 2022-06-06 6:57 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: io-uring; +Cc: Jens Axboe, Pavel Begunkov
From: Hao Xu <[email protected]>
Add a new member hash_index in struct io_kiocb to track the req index
in cancel_hash array. This is needed in later patches.
Signed-off-by: Hao Xu <[email protected]>
---
io_uring/io_uring_types.h | 1 +
io_uring/poll.c | 4 +++-
2 files changed, 4 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
diff --git a/io_uring/io_uring_types.h b/io_uring/io_uring_types.h
index 7c22cf35a7e2..2041ee83467d 100644
--- a/io_uring/io_uring_types.h
+++ b/io_uring/io_uring_types.h
@@ -474,6 +474,7 @@ struct io_kiocb {
u64 extra2;
};
};
+ unsigned int hash_index;
/* internal polling, see IORING_FEAT_FAST_POLL */
struct async_poll *apoll;
/* opcode allocated if it needs to store data for async defer */
diff --git a/io_uring/poll.c b/io_uring/poll.c
index 0df5eca93b16..95e28f32b49c 100644
--- a/io_uring/poll.c
+++ b/io_uring/poll.c
@@ -74,8 +74,10 @@ static void io_poll_req_insert(struct io_kiocb *req)
{
struct io_ring_ctx *ctx = req->ctx;
struct hlist_head *list;
+ u32 index = hash_long(req->cqe.user_data, ctx->cancel_hash_bits);
- list = &ctx->cancel_hash[hash_long(req->cqe.user_data, ctx->cancel_hash_bits)];
+ req->hash_index = index;
+ list = &ctx->cancel_hash[index];
hlist_add_head(&req->hash_node, list);
}
--
2.25.1
^ permalink raw reply related [flat|nested] 11+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/3] io_uring: add an io_hash_bucket structure for smaller granularity lock
2022-06-06 6:57 [PATCH v2 0/3] cancel_hash per entry lock Hao Xu
2022-06-06 6:57 ` [PATCH 1/3] io_uring: add hash_index and its logic to track req in cancel_hash Hao Xu
@ 2022-06-06 6:57 ` Hao Xu
2022-06-06 11:55 ` Pavel Begunkov
2022-06-06 6:57 ` [PATCH 3/3] io_uring: switch cancel_hash to use per list spinlock Hao Xu
2022-06-06 7:06 ` [PATCH v2 0/3] cancel_hash per entry lock Hao Xu
3 siblings, 1 reply; 11+ messages in thread
From: Hao Xu @ 2022-06-06 6:57 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: io-uring; +Cc: Jens Axboe, Pavel Begunkov
From: Hao Xu <[email protected]>
Add a new io_hash_bucket structure so that each bucket in cancel_hash
has separate spinlock. This is a prep patch for later use.
Signed-off-by: Hao Xu <[email protected]>
---
io_uring/cancel.h | 5 +++++
1 file changed, 5 insertions(+)
diff --git a/io_uring/cancel.h b/io_uring/cancel.h
index 4f35d8696325..b9218310611c 100644
--- a/io_uring/cancel.h
+++ b/io_uring/cancel.h
@@ -4,3 +4,8 @@ int io_async_cancel_prep(struct io_kiocb *req, const struct io_uring_sqe *sqe);
int io_async_cancel(struct io_kiocb *req, unsigned int issue_flags);
int io_try_cancel(struct io_kiocb *req, struct io_cancel_data *cd);
+
+struct io_hash_bucket {
+ spinlock_t lock;
+ struct hlist_head list;
+};
--
2.25.1
^ permalink raw reply related [flat|nested] 11+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 3/3] io_uring: switch cancel_hash to use per list spinlock
2022-06-06 6:57 [PATCH v2 0/3] cancel_hash per entry lock Hao Xu
2022-06-06 6:57 ` [PATCH 1/3] io_uring: add hash_index and its logic to track req in cancel_hash Hao Xu
2022-06-06 6:57 ` [PATCH 2/3] io_uring: add an io_hash_bucket structure for smaller granularity lock Hao Xu
@ 2022-06-06 6:57 ` Hao Xu
2022-06-06 7:06 ` [PATCH v2 0/3] cancel_hash per entry lock Hao Xu
3 siblings, 0 replies; 11+ messages in thread
From: Hao Xu @ 2022-06-06 6:57 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: io-uring; +Cc: Jens Axboe, Pavel Begunkov
From: Hao Xu <[email protected]>
Use per list lock for cancel_hash, this removes some completion lock
invocation and remove contension between different cancel_hash entries
Signed-off-by: Hao Xu <[email protected]>
---
io_uring/cancel.c | 15 ++++++++--
io_uring/cancel.h | 1 +
io_uring/fdinfo.c | 9 ++++--
io_uring/io_uring.c | 8 +++--
io_uring/io_uring_types.h | 2 +-
io_uring/poll.c | 62 +++++++++++++++++++++------------------
6 files changed, 59 insertions(+), 38 deletions(-)
diff --git a/io_uring/cancel.c b/io_uring/cancel.c
index 83cceb52d82d..c3e5b8058b0d 100644
--- a/io_uring/cancel.c
+++ b/io_uring/cancel.c
@@ -6,6 +6,7 @@
#include <linux/mm.h>
#include <linux/slab.h>
#include <linux/namei.h>
+#include <linux/list.h>
#include <linux/io_uring.h>
#include <uapi/linux/io_uring.h>
@@ -93,14 +94,14 @@ int io_try_cancel(struct io_kiocb *req, struct io_cancel_data *cd)
if (!ret)
return 0;
- spin_lock(&ctx->completion_lock);
ret = io_poll_cancel(ctx, cd);
if (ret != -ENOENT)
goto out;
+ spin_lock(&ctx->completion_lock);
if (!(cd->flags & IORING_ASYNC_CANCEL_FD))
ret = io_timeout_cancel(ctx, cd);
-out:
spin_unlock(&ctx->completion_lock);
+out:
return ret;
}
@@ -192,3 +193,13 @@ int io_async_cancel(struct io_kiocb *req, unsigned int issue_flags)
io_req_set_res(req, ret, 0);
return IOU_OK;
}
+
+inline void init_hash_table(struct io_hash_bucket *hash_table, unsigned size)
+{
+ unsigned int i;
+
+ for (i = 0; i < size; i++) {
+ spin_lock_init(&hash_table[i].lock);
+ INIT_HLIST_HEAD(&hash_table[i].list);
+ }
+}
diff --git a/io_uring/cancel.h b/io_uring/cancel.h
index b9218310611c..f682e9811e68 100644
--- a/io_uring/cancel.h
+++ b/io_uring/cancel.h
@@ -4,6 +4,7 @@ int io_async_cancel_prep(struct io_kiocb *req, const struct io_uring_sqe *sqe);
int io_async_cancel(struct io_kiocb *req, unsigned int issue_flags);
int io_try_cancel(struct io_kiocb *req, struct io_cancel_data *cd);
+inline void init_hash_table(struct io_hash_bucket *hash_table, unsigned size);
struct io_hash_bucket {
spinlock_t lock;
diff --git a/io_uring/fdinfo.c b/io_uring/fdinfo.c
index fcedde4b4b1e..f941c73f5502 100644
--- a/io_uring/fdinfo.c
+++ b/io_uring/fdinfo.c
@@ -13,6 +13,7 @@
#include "io_uring.h"
#include "sqpoll.h"
#include "fdinfo.h"
+#include "cancel.h"
#ifdef CONFIG_PROC_FS
static __cold int io_uring_show_cred(struct seq_file *m, unsigned int id,
@@ -157,17 +158,19 @@ static __cold void __io_uring_show_fdinfo(struct io_ring_ctx *ctx,
mutex_unlock(&ctx->uring_lock);
seq_puts(m, "PollList:\n");
- spin_lock(&ctx->completion_lock);
for (i = 0; i < (1U << ctx->cancel_hash_bits); i++) {
- struct hlist_head *list = &ctx->cancel_hash[i];
+ struct io_hash_bucket *hb = &ctx->cancel_hash[i];
struct io_kiocb *req;
- hlist_for_each_entry(req, list, hash_node)
+ spin_lock(&hb->lock);
+ hlist_for_each_entry(req, &hb->list, hash_node)
seq_printf(m, " op=%d, task_works=%d\n", req->opcode,
task_work_pending(req->task));
+ spin_unlock(&hb->lock);
}
seq_puts(m, "CqOverflowList:\n");
+ spin_lock(&ctx->completion_lock);
list_for_each_entry(ocqe, &ctx->cq_overflow_list, list) {
struct io_uring_cqe *cqe = &ocqe->cqe;
diff --git a/io_uring/io_uring.c b/io_uring/io_uring.c
index 1572ebe3cff1..b67ab76b9e56 100644
--- a/io_uring/io_uring.c
+++ b/io_uring/io_uring.c
@@ -725,11 +725,13 @@ static __cold struct io_ring_ctx *io_ring_ctx_alloc(struct io_uring_params *p)
if (hash_bits <= 0)
hash_bits = 1;
ctx->cancel_hash_bits = hash_bits;
- ctx->cancel_hash = kmalloc((1U << hash_bits) * sizeof(struct hlist_head),
- GFP_KERNEL);
+ ctx->cancel_hash =
+ kmalloc((1U << hash_bits) * sizeof(struct io_hash_bucket),
+ GFP_KERNEL);
if (!ctx->cancel_hash)
goto err;
- __hash_init(ctx->cancel_hash, 1U << hash_bits);
+
+ init_hash_table(ctx->cancel_hash, 1U << hash_bits);
ctx->dummy_ubuf = kzalloc(sizeof(*ctx->dummy_ubuf), GFP_KERNEL);
if (!ctx->dummy_ubuf)
diff --git a/io_uring/io_uring_types.h b/io_uring/io_uring_types.h
index 2041ee83467d..59231f7345ac 100644
--- a/io_uring/io_uring_types.h
+++ b/io_uring/io_uring_types.h
@@ -230,7 +230,7 @@ struct io_ring_ctx {
* manipulate the list, hence no extra locking is needed there.
*/
struct io_wq_work_list iopoll_list;
- struct hlist_head *cancel_hash;
+ struct io_hash_bucket *cancel_hash;
unsigned cancel_hash_bits;
bool poll_multi_queue;
diff --git a/io_uring/poll.c b/io_uring/poll.c
index 95e28f32b49c..d40fad768d58 100644
--- a/io_uring/poll.c
+++ b/io_uring/poll.c
@@ -19,6 +19,7 @@
#include "opdef.h"
#include "kbuf.h"
#include "poll.h"
+#include "cancel.h"
struct io_poll_update {
struct file *file;
@@ -73,12 +74,22 @@ static struct io_poll *io_poll_get_single(struct io_kiocb *req)
static void io_poll_req_insert(struct io_kiocb *req)
{
struct io_ring_ctx *ctx = req->ctx;
- struct hlist_head *list;
u32 index = hash_long(req->cqe.user_data, ctx->cancel_hash_bits);
+ struct io_hash_bucket *hb = &ctx->cancel_hash[index];
req->hash_index = index;
- list = &ctx->cancel_hash[index];
- hlist_add_head(&req->hash_node, list);
+ spin_lock(&hb->lock);
+ hlist_add_head(&req->hash_node, &hb->list);
+ spin_unlock(&hb->lock);
+}
+
+static void io_poll_req_delete(struct io_kiocb *req, struct io_ring_ctx *ctx)
+{
+ spinlock_t *lock = &ctx->cancel_hash[req->hash_index].lock;
+
+ spin_lock(lock);
+ hash_del(&req->hash_node);
+ spin_unlock(lock);
}
static void io_init_poll_iocb(struct io_poll *poll, __poll_t events,
@@ -222,8 +233,8 @@ static void io_poll_task_func(struct io_kiocb *req, bool *locked)
}
io_poll_remove_entries(req);
+ io_poll_req_delete(req, ctx);
spin_lock(&ctx->completion_lock);
- hash_del(&req->hash_node);
req->cqe.flags = 0;
__io_req_complete_post(req);
io_commit_cqring(ctx);
@@ -233,7 +244,6 @@ static void io_poll_task_func(struct io_kiocb *req, bool *locked)
static void io_apoll_task_func(struct io_kiocb *req, bool *locked)
{
- struct io_ring_ctx *ctx = req->ctx;
int ret;
ret = io_poll_check_events(req, locked);
@@ -241,9 +251,7 @@ static void io_apoll_task_func(struct io_kiocb *req, bool *locked)
return;
io_poll_remove_entries(req);
- spin_lock(&ctx->completion_lock);
- hash_del(&req->hash_node);
- spin_unlock(&ctx->completion_lock);
+ io_poll_req_delete(req, req->ctx);
if (!ret)
io_req_task_submit(req, locked);
@@ -437,9 +445,7 @@ static int __io_arm_poll_handler(struct io_kiocb *req,
return 0;
}
- spin_lock(&ctx->completion_lock);
io_poll_req_insert(req);
- spin_unlock(&ctx->completion_lock);
if (mask && (poll->events & EPOLLET)) {
/* can't multishot if failed, just queue the event we've got */
@@ -536,32 +542,32 @@ __cold bool io_poll_remove_all(struct io_ring_ctx *ctx, struct task_struct *tsk,
bool found = false;
int i;
- spin_lock(&ctx->completion_lock);
for (i = 0; i < (1U << ctx->cancel_hash_bits); i++) {
- struct hlist_head *list;
+ struct io_hash_bucket *hb = &ctx->cancel_hash[i];
- list = &ctx->cancel_hash[i];
- hlist_for_each_entry_safe(req, tmp, list, hash_node) {
+ spin_lock(&hb->lock);
+ hlist_for_each_entry_safe(req, tmp, &hb->list, hash_node) {
if (io_match_task_safe(req, tsk, cancel_all)) {
hlist_del_init(&req->hash_node);
io_poll_cancel_req(req);
found = true;
}
}
+ spin_unlock(&hb->lock);
}
- spin_unlock(&ctx->completion_lock);
return found;
}
static struct io_kiocb *io_poll_find(struct io_ring_ctx *ctx, bool poll_only,
struct io_cancel_data *cd)
- __must_hold(&ctx->completion_lock)
{
- struct hlist_head *list;
struct io_kiocb *req;
- list = &ctx->cancel_hash[hash_long(cd->data, ctx->cancel_hash_bits)];
- hlist_for_each_entry(req, list, hash_node) {
+ u32 index = hash_long(cd->data, ctx->cancel_hash_bits);
+ struct io_hash_bucket *hb = &ctx->cancel_hash[index];
+
+ spin_lock(&hb->lock);
+ hlist_for_each_entry(req, &hb->list, hash_node) {
if (cd->data != req->cqe.user_data)
continue;
if (poll_only && req->opcode != IORING_OP_POLL_ADD)
@@ -571,47 +577,48 @@ static struct io_kiocb *io_poll_find(struct io_ring_ctx *ctx, bool poll_only,
continue;
req->work.cancel_seq = cd->seq;
}
+ spin_unlock(&hb->lock);
return req;
}
+ spin_unlock(&hb->lock);
return NULL;
}
static struct io_kiocb *io_poll_file_find(struct io_ring_ctx *ctx,
struct io_cancel_data *cd)
- __must_hold(&ctx->completion_lock)
{
struct io_kiocb *req;
int i;
for (i = 0; i < (1U << ctx->cancel_hash_bits); i++) {
- struct hlist_head *list;
+ struct io_hash_bucket *hb = &ctx->cancel_hash[i];
- list = &ctx->cancel_hash[i];
- hlist_for_each_entry(req, list, hash_node) {
+ spin_lock(&hb->lock);
+ hlist_for_each_entry(req, &hb->list, hash_node) {
if (!(cd->flags & IORING_ASYNC_CANCEL_ANY) &&
req->file != cd->file)
continue;
if (cd->seq == req->work.cancel_seq)
continue;
req->work.cancel_seq = cd->seq;
+ spin_unlock(&hb->lock);
return req;
}
+ spin_unlock(&hb->lock);
}
return NULL;
}
static bool io_poll_disarm(struct io_kiocb *req)
- __must_hold(&ctx->completion_lock)
{
if (!io_poll_get_ownership(req))
return false;
io_poll_remove_entries(req);
- hash_del(&req->hash_node);
+ io_poll_req_delete(req, req->ctx);
return true;
}
int io_poll_cancel(struct io_ring_ctx *ctx, struct io_cancel_data *cd)
- __must_hold(&ctx->completion_lock)
{
struct io_kiocb *req;
@@ -720,14 +727,11 @@ int io_poll_remove(struct io_kiocb *req, unsigned int issue_flags)
int ret2, ret = 0;
bool locked;
- spin_lock(&ctx->completion_lock);
preq = io_poll_find(ctx, true, &cd);
if (!preq || !io_poll_disarm(preq)) {
- spin_unlock(&ctx->completion_lock);
ret = preq ? -EALREADY : -ENOENT;
goto out;
}
- spin_unlock(&ctx->completion_lock);
if (poll_update->update_events || poll_update->update_user_data) {
/* only mask one event flags, keep behavior flags */
--
2.25.1
^ permalink raw reply related [flat|nested] 11+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH v2 0/3] cancel_hash per entry lock
2022-06-06 6:57 [PATCH v2 0/3] cancel_hash per entry lock Hao Xu
` (2 preceding siblings ...)
2022-06-06 6:57 ` [PATCH 3/3] io_uring: switch cancel_hash to use per list spinlock Hao Xu
@ 2022-06-06 7:06 ` Hao Xu
2022-06-06 12:02 ` Pavel Begunkov
3 siblings, 1 reply; 11+ messages in thread
From: Hao Xu @ 2022-06-06 7:06 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: io-uring; +Cc: Jens Axboe, Pavel Begunkov
On 6/6/22 14:57, Hao Xu wrote:
> From: Hao Xu <[email protected]>
>
> Make per entry lock for cancel_hash array, this reduces usage of
> completion_lock and contension between cancel_hash entries.
>
> v1->v2:
> - Add per entry lock for poll/apoll task work code which was missed
> in v1
> - add an member in io_kiocb to track req's indice in cancel_hash
Tried to test it with many poll_add IOSQQE_ASYNC requests but turned out
that there is little conpletion_lock contention, so no visible change in
data. But I still think this may be good for cancel_hash access in some
real cases where completion lock matters.
Regards,
Hao
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 11+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH 2/3] io_uring: add an io_hash_bucket structure for smaller granularity lock
2022-06-06 6:57 ` [PATCH 2/3] io_uring: add an io_hash_bucket structure for smaller granularity lock Hao Xu
@ 2022-06-06 11:55 ` Pavel Begunkov
0 siblings, 0 replies; 11+ messages in thread
From: Pavel Begunkov @ 2022-06-06 11:55 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Hao Xu, io-uring; +Cc: Jens Axboe
On 6/6/22 07:57, Hao Xu wrote:
> From: Hao Xu <[email protected]>
>
> Add a new io_hash_bucket structure so that each bucket in cancel_hash
> has separate spinlock. This is a prep patch for later use.
>
> Signed-off-by: Hao Xu <[email protected]>
> ---
> io_uring/cancel.h | 5 +++++
> 1 file changed, 5 insertions(+)
>
> diff --git a/io_uring/cancel.h b/io_uring/cancel.h
> index 4f35d8696325..b9218310611c 100644
> --- a/io_uring/cancel.h
> +++ b/io_uring/cancel.h
> @@ -4,3 +4,8 @@ int io_async_cancel_prep(struct io_kiocb *req, const struct io_uring_sqe *sqe);
> int io_async_cancel(struct io_kiocb *req, unsigned int issue_flags);
>
> int io_try_cancel(struct io_kiocb *req, struct io_cancel_data *cd);
> +
> +struct io_hash_bucket {
> + spinlock_t lock;
> + struct hlist_head list;
> +};
please, in future just merge such patches into the next one,
separately it doesn't do anything meaningful, the struct is
not used here and IMHO only makes reviewing harder.
--
Pavel Begunkov
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 11+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH 1/3] io_uring: add hash_index and its logic to track req in cancel_hash
2022-06-06 6:57 ` [PATCH 1/3] io_uring: add hash_index and its logic to track req in cancel_hash Hao Xu
@ 2022-06-06 11:59 ` Pavel Begunkov
2022-06-06 13:47 ` Hao Xu
0 siblings, 1 reply; 11+ messages in thread
From: Pavel Begunkov @ 2022-06-06 11:59 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Hao Xu, io-uring; +Cc: Jens Axboe
On 6/6/22 07:57, Hao Xu wrote:
> From: Hao Xu <[email protected]>
>
> Add a new member hash_index in struct io_kiocb to track the req index
> in cancel_hash array. This is needed in later patches.
>
> Signed-off-by: Hao Xu <[email protected]>
> ---
> io_uring/io_uring_types.h | 1 +
> io_uring/poll.c | 4 +++-
> 2 files changed, 4 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
>
> diff --git a/io_uring/io_uring_types.h b/io_uring/io_uring_types.h
> index 7c22cf35a7e2..2041ee83467d 100644
> --- a/io_uring/io_uring_types.h
> +++ b/io_uring/io_uring_types.h
> @@ -474,6 +474,7 @@ struct io_kiocb {
> u64 extra2;
> };
> };
> + unsigned int hash_index;
Didn't take a closer look, but can we make rid of it?
E.g. computing it again when ejecting a request from
the hash? or keep it in struct io_poll?
> /* internal polling, see IORING_FEAT_FAST_POLL */
> struct async_poll *apoll;
> /* opcode allocated if it needs to store data for async defer */
> diff --git a/io_uring/poll.c b/io_uring/poll.c
> index 0df5eca93b16..95e28f32b49c 100644
> --- a/io_uring/poll.c
> +++ b/io_uring/poll.c
> @@ -74,8 +74,10 @@ static void io_poll_req_insert(struct io_kiocb *req)
> {
> struct io_ring_ctx *ctx = req->ctx;
> struct hlist_head *list;
> + u32 index = hash_long(req->cqe.user_data, ctx->cancel_hash_bits);
>
> - list = &ctx->cancel_hash[hash_long(req->cqe.user_data, ctx->cancel_hash_bits)];
> + req->hash_index = index;
> + list = &ctx->cancel_hash[index];
> hlist_add_head(&req->hash_node, list);
> }
>
--
Pavel Begunkov
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 11+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH v2 0/3] cancel_hash per entry lock
2022-06-06 7:06 ` [PATCH v2 0/3] cancel_hash per entry lock Hao Xu
@ 2022-06-06 12:02 ` Pavel Begunkov
2022-06-06 12:09 ` Pavel Begunkov
2022-06-06 13:39 ` Hao Xu
0 siblings, 2 replies; 11+ messages in thread
From: Pavel Begunkov @ 2022-06-06 12:02 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Hao Xu, io-uring; +Cc: Jens Axboe
On 6/6/22 08:06, Hao Xu wrote:
> On 6/6/22 14:57, Hao Xu wrote:
>> From: Hao Xu <[email protected]>
>>
>> Make per entry lock for cancel_hash array, this reduces usage of
>> completion_lock and contension between cancel_hash entries.
>>
>> v1->v2:
>> - Add per entry lock for poll/apoll task work code which was missed
>> in v1
>> - add an member in io_kiocb to track req's indice in cancel_hash
>
> Tried to test it with many poll_add IOSQQE_ASYNC requests but turned out
> that there is little conpletion_lock contention, so no visible change in
> data. But I still think this may be good for cancel_hash access in some
> real cases where completion lock matters.
Conceptually I don't mind it, but let me ask in what
circumstances you expect it to make a difference? And
what can we do to get favourable numbers? For instance,
how many CPUs io-wq was using?
--
Pavel Begunkov
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 11+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH v2 0/3] cancel_hash per entry lock
2022-06-06 12:02 ` Pavel Begunkov
@ 2022-06-06 12:09 ` Pavel Begunkov
2022-06-06 13:39 ` Hao Xu
1 sibling, 0 replies; 11+ messages in thread
From: Pavel Begunkov @ 2022-06-06 12:09 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Hao Xu, io-uring; +Cc: Jens Axboe
On 6/6/22 13:02, Pavel Begunkov wrote:
> On 6/6/22 08:06, Hao Xu wrote:
>> On 6/6/22 14:57, Hao Xu wrote:
>>> From: Hao Xu <[email protected]>
>>>
>>> Make per entry lock for cancel_hash array, this reduces usage of
>>> completion_lock and contension between cancel_hash entries.
>>>
>>> v1->v2:
>>> - Add per entry lock for poll/apoll task work code which was missed
>>> in v1
>>> - add an member in io_kiocb to track req's indice in cancel_hash
>>
>> Tried to test it with many poll_add IOSQQE_ASYNC requests but turned out
>> that there is little conpletion_lock contention, so no visible change in
>> data. But I still think this may be good for cancel_hash access in some
>> real cases where completion lock matters.
>
> Conceptually I don't mind it, but let me ask in what
> circumstances you expect it to make a difference? And
> what can we do to get favourable numbers? For instance,
> how many CPUs io-wq was using?
Btw, I couldn't find ____cacheline_aligned_in_smp anywhere,
which I expect around those new spinlocks to avoid them sharing
cache lines
--
Pavel Begunkov
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 11+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH v2 0/3] cancel_hash per entry lock
2022-06-06 12:02 ` Pavel Begunkov
2022-06-06 12:09 ` Pavel Begunkov
@ 2022-06-06 13:39 ` Hao Xu
1 sibling, 0 replies; 11+ messages in thread
From: Hao Xu @ 2022-06-06 13:39 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Pavel Begunkov, io-uring; +Cc: Jens Axboe
On 6/6/22 20:02, Pavel Begunkov wrote:
> On 6/6/22 08:06, Hao Xu wrote:
>> On 6/6/22 14:57, Hao Xu wrote:
>>> From: Hao Xu <[email protected]>
>>>
>>> Make per entry lock for cancel_hash array, this reduces usage of
>>> completion_lock and contension between cancel_hash entries.
>>>
>>> v1->v2:
>>> - Add per entry lock for poll/apoll task work code which was missed
>>> in v1
>>> - add an member in io_kiocb to track req's indice in cancel_hash
>>
>> Tried to test it with many poll_add IOSQQE_ASYNC requests but turned out
>> that there is little conpletion_lock contention, so no visible change in
>> data. But I still think this may be good for cancel_hash access in some
>> real cases where completion lock matters.
>
> Conceptually I don't mind it, but let me ask in what
> circumstances you expect it to make a difference? And
I suppose there are cases where a bunch of users trying to access
cancel_hash[] at the same time when people use multiple threads to
submit sqes or they use IOSQE_ASYNC. And these io-workers or task works
run parallel on different CPUs.
> what can we do to get favourable numbers? For instance,
> how many CPUs io-wq was using?
It is not easy to construct manually since it is related with task
scheduling, like if we just issue many IOSQE_ASYNC polls in an
idle machine with many CPUs, there won't be much contention because of
different thread start time(thus they access cancel_hash at different
time
>
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 11+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH 1/3] io_uring: add hash_index and its logic to track req in cancel_hash
2022-06-06 11:59 ` Pavel Begunkov
@ 2022-06-06 13:47 ` Hao Xu
0 siblings, 0 replies; 11+ messages in thread
From: Hao Xu @ 2022-06-06 13:47 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Pavel Begunkov, io-uring; +Cc: Jens Axboe
On 6/6/22 19:59, Pavel Begunkov wrote:
> On 6/6/22 07:57, Hao Xu wrote:
>> From: Hao Xu <[email protected]>
>>
>> Add a new member hash_index in struct io_kiocb to track the req index
>> in cancel_hash array. This is needed in later patches.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Hao Xu <[email protected]>
>> ---
>> io_uring/io_uring_types.h | 1 +
>> io_uring/poll.c | 4 +++-
>> 2 files changed, 4 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/io_uring/io_uring_types.h b/io_uring/io_uring_types.h
>> index 7c22cf35a7e2..2041ee83467d 100644
>> --- a/io_uring/io_uring_types.h
>> +++ b/io_uring/io_uring_types.h
>> @@ -474,6 +474,7 @@ struct io_kiocb {
>> u64 extra2;
>> };
>> };
>> + unsigned int hash_index;
>
> Didn't take a closer look, but can we make rid of it?
> E.g. computing it again when ejecting a request from
> the hash? or keep it in struct io_poll?
Good point, I prefer moving it to io_poll to computing it again since
this patchset is to try to make it faster.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 11+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2022-06-06 13:48 UTC | newest]
Thread overview: 11+ messages (download: mbox.gz follow: Atom feed
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2022-06-06 6:57 [PATCH v2 0/3] cancel_hash per entry lock Hao Xu
2022-06-06 6:57 ` [PATCH 1/3] io_uring: add hash_index and its logic to track req in cancel_hash Hao Xu
2022-06-06 11:59 ` Pavel Begunkov
2022-06-06 13:47 ` Hao Xu
2022-06-06 6:57 ` [PATCH 2/3] io_uring: add an io_hash_bucket structure for smaller granularity lock Hao Xu
2022-06-06 11:55 ` Pavel Begunkov
2022-06-06 6:57 ` [PATCH 3/3] io_uring: switch cancel_hash to use per list spinlock Hao Xu
2022-06-06 7:06 ` [PATCH v2 0/3] cancel_hash per entry lock Hao Xu
2022-06-06 12:02 ` Pavel Begunkov
2022-06-06 12:09 ` Pavel Begunkov
2022-06-06 13:39 ` Hao Xu
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox