From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-5.3 required=3.0 tests=DKIM_SIGNED,DKIM_VALID, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SIGNED_OFF_BY,SPF_HELO_NONE, SPF_PASS,USER_AGENT_SANE_1 autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 47FBAC33CB1 for ; Thu, 16 Jan 2020 15:29:10 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 183932072B for ; Thu, 16 Jan 2020 15:29:10 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=kernel-dk.20150623.gappssmtp.com header.i=@kernel-dk.20150623.gappssmtp.com header.b="0s0D+UFa" Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1726343AbgAPP3J (ORCPT ); Thu, 16 Jan 2020 10:29:09 -0500 Received: from mail-io1-f65.google.com ([209.85.166.65]:44454 "EHLO mail-io1-f65.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1726160AbgAPP3J (ORCPT ); Thu, 16 Jan 2020 10:29:09 -0500 Received: by mail-io1-f65.google.com with SMTP id b10so22174057iof.11 for ; Thu, 16 Jan 2020 07:29:09 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=kernel-dk.20150623.gappssmtp.com; s=20150623; h=subject:to:cc:references:from:message-id:date:user-agent :mime-version:in-reply-to:content-language:content-transfer-encoding; bh=JJcFvW8HJdilHnnCk22v1SBtvRGSSS8XKcSjVtOnrIo=; b=0s0D+UFaDYK6xrnqFY4RWZ85Cw7sAB42ZD2xHfNT4EsZ8JKtak1k8ZZJkGlzDu2xjs vtiRoN3kZV35k2FNoji6lV3M3AXln6xx0pK6i1QWFcPPwk1zFP66wOQBx2kK/zDvHhqP wJKpoeJBgZaKuLE3NQoKBI0Nk21N+Yda0ZXBE+ftxkdvzkhdDxnsYvHDhVcVMtfwf80A SEMW5nm1fVcomadiPkmyRAoAMT58nuqIKsSvI7sj6dzPm7wkj89fWecNSQETVuwX1Psw NH6k2NcvHyJJsBxf2A49ORcsV5O0eI1qiKcVaQUi+E8RIdKbSMzTsZWgLuZfgE4h8HjD EV2Q== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:subject:to:cc:references:from:message-id:date :user-agent:mime-version:in-reply-to:content-language :content-transfer-encoding; bh=JJcFvW8HJdilHnnCk22v1SBtvRGSSS8XKcSjVtOnrIo=; b=BIT3UDvjFLRshxERWhShdvc1IjSlroWv4IzgT4pHoVkwpmqD76lc8nZi6RtVjxTu17 YJIlWV7Rna0WO3I4AmzDOTcCn0YPXxPmAQtjF5OWFP3Na5u7yrZhJtYDkbkxjb+djeC7 2COOzGFAyjXI/0myMvfwFe4hmPIzIcXu3sWuEUhW8qZidgn3Lz9bcMTdftcAxcbZ75Ou UDTO7by59afvjHS44+TOOecVfxS1SOHM/r3janiVGr43AjtQFkS+mZfayMAB5fbOPuQL HRopG4vsljLe0NbT3HD8AnK2cHyNyvPXXlMmri5ykQBB77Ph3mXeg1icrto+5N1ceDyO z7xA== X-Gm-Message-State: APjAAAWBIk4itt3nPDcty0qmrhEONrHhyvZiEiumI4+hac1GbYaB3I3Y 2U885YI07QY0fmVtwSbpz/WxsQ== X-Google-Smtp-Source: APXvYqyq+mjlgPuHivk2+TNQ161jCn6GCai4KGnDmwom0xMohe+U1BAqMlNQy9ae2riH2dgDMe5KUQ== X-Received: by 2002:a02:8587:: with SMTP id d7mr28917545jai.39.1579188548882; Thu, 16 Jan 2020 07:29:08 -0800 (PST) Received: from [192.168.1.159] ([65.144.74.34]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id b7sm2870279ioq.39.2020.01.16.07.29.08 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 bits=128/128); Thu, 16 Jan 2020 07:29:08 -0800 (PST) Subject: Re: [PATCH] io_uring: wakeup threads waiting for EPOLLOUT events To: Stefano Garzarella Cc: Alexander Viro , io-uring@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org References: <20200116134946.184711-1-sgarzare@redhat.com> From: Jens Axboe Message-ID: <2d2dda92-3c50-ee62-5ffe-0589d4c8fc0d@kernel.dk> Date: Thu, 16 Jan 2020 08:29:07 -0700 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:68.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/68.2.2 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <20200116134946.184711-1-sgarzare@redhat.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Language: en-US Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: io-uring-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: io-uring@vger.kernel.org On 1/16/20 6:49 AM, Stefano Garzarella wrote: > io_uring_poll() sets EPOLLOUT flag if there is space in the > SQ ring, then we should wakeup threads waiting for EPOLLOUT > events when we expose the new SQ head to the userspace. > > Signed-off-by: Stefano Garzarella > --- > > Do you think is better to change the name of 'cq_wait' and 'cq_fasync'? I honestly think it'd be better to have separate waits for in/out poll, the below patch will introduce some unfortunate cacheline traffic between the submitter and completer side. -- Jens Axboe