From: "Michal Koutný" <[email protected]>
To: Daniel Dao <[email protected]>
Cc: Jens Axboe <[email protected]>, io-uring <[email protected]>,
Waiman Long <[email protected]>,
[email protected]
Subject: Re: [PATCH] io_uring/io-wq: stop setting PF_NO_SETAFFINITY on io-wq workers
Date: Tue, 14 Mar 2023 17:25:59 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20230314162559.pnyxdllzgw7jozgx@blackpad> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CA+wXwBRGzfZB9tjKy5C2_pW1Z4yH2gNGxx79Fk-p3UsOWKGdqA@mail.gmail.com>
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1802 bytes --]
Hello.
On Tue, Mar 14, 2023 at 10:07:40AM +0000, Daniel Dao <[email protected]> wrote:
> IMO this violated the principle of cpuset and can be confusing for end users.
> I think I prefer Waiman's suggestion of allowing an implicit move to cpuset
> when enabling cpuset with subtree_control but not explicit moves such as when
> setting cpuset.cpus or writing the pids into cgroup.procs. It's easier to reason
> about and make the failure mode more explicit.
>
> What do you think ?
I think cpuset should top IO worker's affinity (like sched_setaffinity(2)).
Thus:
- modifying cpuset.cpus update task's affinity, for sure
- implicit migration (enabling cpuset) update task's affinity, effective nop
- explicit migration (meh) update task's affinity, ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
My understanding of PF_NO_SETAFFINITY is that's for kernel threads that
do work that's functionally needed on a given CPU and thus they cannot
be migrated [1]. As said previously for io_uring workers, affinity is
for performance only.
Hence, I'd also suggest on top of 01e68ce08a30 ("io_uring/io-wq: stop
setting PF_NO_SETAFFINITY on io-wq workers"):
--- a/io_uring/sqpoll.c
+++ b/io_uring/sqpoll.c
@@ -233,7 +233,6 @@ static int io_sq_thread(void *data)
set_cpus_allowed_ptr(current, cpumask_of(sqd->sq_cpu));
else
set_cpus_allowed_ptr(current, cpu_online_mask);
- current->flags |= PF_NO_SETAFFINITY;
mutex_lock(&sqd->lock);
while (1) {
Afterall, io_uring_setup(2) already mentions:
> When cgroup setting cpuset.cpus changes (typically in container
> environment), the bounded cpu set may be changed as well.
HTH,
Michal
[1] Ideally, those should always remain in the root cpuset cgroup.
[-- Attachment #2: signature.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 228 bytes --]
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2023-03-14 16:26 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 5+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2023-03-08 14:27 [PATCH] io_uring/io-wq: stop setting PF_NO_SETAFFINITY on io-wq workers Jens Axboe
2023-03-14 10:07 ` Daniel Dao
2023-03-14 16:25 ` Michal Koutný [this message]
2023-03-14 16:48 ` Jens Axboe
2023-03-14 18:17 ` Waiman Long
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 \
--in-reply-to=20230314162559.pnyxdllzgw7jozgx@blackpad \
[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