public inbox for [email protected]
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: hexue <[email protected]>
To: [email protected]
Cc: [email protected], [email protected],
	[email protected], [email protected],
	[email protected], [email protected],
	[email protected], [email protected],
	[email protected], [email protected],
	[email protected], [email protected]
Subject: Re: Re: io_uring: releasing CPU resources when polling.
Date: Thu, 18 Apr 2024 14:07:16 +0800	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <[email protected]> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <[email protected]>

On 3/26/24  3:39, Jens Axboe wrote:
>On 3/25/24 9:23 PM, Xue wrote:
>> Hi,
>> 
>> I hope this message finds you well.
>> 
>> I'm waiting to follow up on the patch I submitted on 3.18,
>> titled "io_uring: releasing CPU resources when polling".
>> 
>> I haven't received feedback yet and wondering if you had
>> a chance to look at it. Any guidance or suggestions you could
>> provide would be greatly appreciated.
>
>I did take a look at it, and I have to be honest - I don't like it at
>all. It's a lot of expensive code in the fast path, for a problem that
>should not really exist. The system is misconfigured if you're doing
>polled IO for devices that don't have a poll queue. At some point the
>block layer returned -EOPNOTSUPP for that, and honestly I think that's a
>MUCH better solution than adding expensive code in the fast path for
>something that is really a badly configured setup.

Sorry for my late reply, if you think that the scenario where if you're 
doing polled IO for devices that don't have a poll queue is just a 
misconfigured and does not need to be changed too much, then I'm inclined
to extend this scenario to all devices, I think it's an effective way to
release CPU resources, and I verified this and found that it does have a
very good benefit. At the same time I have reduce the code in the fast
path. I will release the v2 version of the code with my test results,
and please reconsider the feasibility of this solution.

--
Xue

      parent reply	other threads:[~2024-04-18  6:07 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 4+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
     [not found] <CGME20240318090025epcas5p452bc7fea225684119c7ebc139787f848@epcas5p4.samsung.com>
2024-03-18  9:00 ` [PATCH] io_uring: releasing CPU resources when polling Xue
     [not found]   ` <CGME20240326032337epcas5p4d4725729834e3fdb006293d1aab4053d@epcas5p4.samsung.com>
2024-03-26  3:23     ` Xue
2024-03-26  3:39       ` io_uring: " Jens Axboe
     [not found]         ` <CGME20240418060723epcas5p148ac18fa70b10a2bbbde916130277a18@epcas5p1.samsung.com>
2024-04-18  6:07           ` hexue [this message]

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] \
    [email protected] \
    [email protected] \
    [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