public inbox for [email protected]
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Dylan Yudaken <[email protected]>
To: Jens Axboe <[email protected]>, Pavel Begunkov <[email protected]>
Cc: <[email protected]>, <[email protected]>,
	Dylan Yudaken <[email protected]>
Subject: [PATCH for-next 0/4] io_uring: force async only ops to go async
Date: Fri, 27 Jan 2023 05:52:23 -0800	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <[email protected]> (raw)

Many ops such as statx do not support nonblock issuing (for now). At the
moment the code goes through the issue call just to receive -EAGAIN and
then be run async. There is no need for this as internally the
REQ_F_FORCE_ASYNC flag can just be added on.

The upside for this is generally minimal, and possibly you may decide that
it's not worth the extra risk of bugs. Though as far as I can tell the
risk is simply doing a blocking call from io_uring_enter(2), which while
still a bug is not disasterous.

While doing this I noticed that linked requests are actually issued with
IO_URING_F_NONBLOCK first regardless of the IOSQE_ASYNC flag, and so I
fixed this at the same time. The difference should be neglegible I assume.

Note this depends on the drain fix I have just sent for 6.2.

Patch 1 is the fix.
Patch 2 forces async for the easy cases where it is always on
Patch 3/4 is for fadvise/open which require a bit of logic to determine whether
or not to force async

Dylan Yudaken (4):
  io_uring: if a linked request has REQ_F_FORCE_ASYNC then run it async
  io_uring: for requests that require async, force it
  io_uring: always go async for unsupported fadvise flags
  io_uring: always go async for unsupported open flags

 io_uring/advise.c    | 29 +++++++++++++++++------------
 io_uring/fs.c        | 20 ++++++++++----------
 io_uring/io_uring.c  |  8 +++++---
 io_uring/net.c       |  4 ++--
 io_uring/openclose.c | 18 ++++++++++++------
 io_uring/splice.c    |  7 +++----
 io_uring/statx.c     |  4 ++--
 io_uring/sync.c      | 14 ++++++++------
 io_uring/xattr.c     | 14 ++++++--------
 9 files changed, 65 insertions(+), 53 deletions(-)


base-commit: cea6756d62abfc4791efc81d1f6afa016ed8df8c
-- 
2.30.2


             reply	other threads:[~2023-01-27 13:52 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 11+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2023-01-27 13:52 Dylan Yudaken [this message]
2023-01-27 13:52 ` [PATCH for-next 1/4] io_uring: if a linked request has REQ_F_FORCE_ASYNC then run it async Dylan Yudaken
2023-01-29 22:57   ` Jens Axboe
2023-01-29 23:17     ` Jens Axboe
2023-01-30 10:45       ` Dylan Yudaken
2023-01-30 15:53         ` Jens Axboe
2023-01-30 16:21           ` Pavel Begunkov
2023-01-27 13:52 ` [PATCH for-next 2/4] io_uring: for requests that require async, force it Dylan Yudaken
2023-01-27 13:52 ` [PATCH for-next 3/4] io_uring: always go async for unsupported fadvise flags Dylan Yudaken
2023-01-27 13:52 ` [PATCH for-next 4/4] io_uring: always go async for unsupported open flags Dylan Yudaken
2023-01-29 22:20 ` [PATCH for-next 0/4] io_uring: force async only ops to go async Jens Axboe

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] \
    [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