From: Xiaoguang Wang <[email protected]>
To: [email protected]
Cc: [email protected], [email protected]
Subject: Re: [PATCH] io_uring: don't take percpu_ref operations for registered files in IOPOLL mode
Date: Thu, 5 Nov 2020 11:20:26 +0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <[email protected]> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <[email protected]>
hi,
> In io_file_get() and io_put_file(), currently we use percpu_ref_get() and
> percpu_ref_put() for registered files, but it's hard to say they're very
> light-weight synchronization primitives, especially in arm platform. In one
> our arm machine, I get below perf data(registered files enabled):
> Samples: 98K of event 'cycles:ppp', Event count (approx.): 63789396810
> Overhead Command Shared Object Symbol
> ...
> 0.78% io_uring-sq [kernel.vmlinux] [k] io_file_get
> There is an obvious overhead that can not be ignored.
>
> Currently I don't find any good and generic solution for this issue, but
> in IOPOLL mode, given that we can always ensure get/put registered files
> under uring_lock, we can use a simple and plain u64 counter to synchronize
> with registered files update operations in __io_sqe_files_update().
>
> With this patch, perf data show shows:
> Samples: 104K of event 'cycles:ppp', Event count (approx.): 67478249890
> Overhead Command Shared Object Symbol
> ...
> 0.27% io_uring-sq [kernel.vmlinux] [k] io_file_get
The above %0.78 => %0.27 improvements are observed in arm machine with 4.19 kernel.
In upstream mainline codes, since this patch "2b0d3d3e4fcf percpu_ref: reduce memory
footprint of percpu_ref in fast path", I believe the io_file_get's overhead would
be further smaller. I have same tests in same machine, in upstream codes with my patch,
now the io_file_get's overhead is %0.44.
This patch's idea is simple, and now seems it only gives minor performance improvement,
do you have any comments about this patch, should I continue re-send it?
Regards,
Xiaoguang Wang
>
> Signed-off-by: Xiaoguang Wang <[email protected]>
> ---
> fs/io_uring.c | 58 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-------
> 1 file changed, 50 insertions(+), 8 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/fs/io_uring.c b/fs/io_uring.c
> index ce69bd9b0838..186072861af9 100644
> --- a/fs/io_uring.c
> +++ b/fs/io_uring.c
> @@ -195,6 +195,11 @@ struct fixed_file_table {
>
> struct fixed_file_ref_node {
> struct percpu_ref refs;
> + /*
> + * Track the number of reqs that reference this node, currently it's
> + * only used in IOPOLL mode.
> + */
> + u64 count;
> struct list_head node;
> struct list_head file_list;
> struct fixed_file_data *file_data;
> @@ -651,7 +656,10 @@ struct io_kiocb {
> */
> struct list_head inflight_entry;
>
> - struct percpu_ref *fixed_file_refs;
> + union {
> + struct percpu_ref *fixed_file_refs;
> + struct fixed_file_ref_node *fixed_file_ref_node;
> + };
> struct callback_head task_work;
> /* for polled requests, i.e. IORING_OP_POLL_ADD and async armed poll */
> struct hlist_node hash_node;
> @@ -1544,9 +1552,20 @@ static struct io_kiocb *io_alloc_req(struct io_ring_ctx *ctx,
> static inline void io_put_file(struct io_kiocb *req, struct file *file,
> bool fixed)
> {
> - if (fixed)
> - percpu_ref_put(req->fixed_file_refs);
> - else
> + struct io_ring_ctx *ctx = req->ctx;
> +
> + if (fixed) {
> + /* See same comments in io_sqe_files_unregister(). */
> + if (ctx->flags & IORING_SETUP_IOPOLL) {
> + struct fixed_file_ref_node *ref_node = req->fixed_file_ref_node;
> + struct percpu_ref *refs = &ref_node->refs;
> +
> + ref_node->count--;
> + if ((ctx->file_data->cur_refs != refs) && !ref_node->count)
> + percpu_ref_kill(refs);
> + } else
> + percpu_ref_put(req->fixed_file_refs);
> + } else
> fput(file);
> }
>
> @@ -5967,8 +5986,21 @@ static int io_file_get(struct io_submit_state *state, struct io_kiocb *req,
> fd = array_index_nospec(fd, ctx->nr_user_files);
> file = io_file_from_index(ctx, fd);
> if (file) {
> - req->fixed_file_refs = ctx->file_data->cur_refs;
> - percpu_ref_get(req->fixed_file_refs);
> + struct percpu_ref *refs = ctx->file_data->cur_refs;
> +
> + /*
> + * In IOPOLL mode, we can always ensure get/put registered files under
> + * uring_lock, so we can use a simple and plain u64 counter to synchronize
> + * with registered files update operations in __io_sqe_files_update.
> + */
> + if (ctx->flags & IORING_SETUP_IOPOLL) {
> + req->fixed_file_ref_node = container_of(refs,
> + struct fixed_file_ref_node, refs);
> + req->fixed_file_ref_node->count++;
> + } else {
> + req->fixed_file_refs = refs;
> + percpu_ref_get(refs);
> + }
> }
> } else {
> trace_io_uring_file_get(ctx, fd);
> @@ -6781,7 +6813,12 @@ static int io_sqe_files_unregister(struct io_ring_ctx *ctx)
> ref_node = list_first_entry(&data->ref_list,
> struct fixed_file_ref_node, node);
> spin_unlock(&data->lock);
> - if (ref_node)
> + /*
> + * If count is not zero, that means we're in IOPOLL mode, and there are
> + * still reqs that reference this ref_node, let the final req do the
> + * percpu_ref_kill job.
> + */
> + if (ref_node && !ref_node->count)
> percpu_ref_kill(&ref_node->refs);
>
> percpu_ref_kill(&data->refs);
> @@ -7363,7 +7400,12 @@ static int __io_sqe_files_update(struct io_ring_ctx *ctx,
> }
>
> if (needs_switch) {
> - percpu_ref_kill(data->cur_refs);
> + struct fixed_file_ref_node *old_ref_node = container_of(data->cur_refs,
> + struct fixed_file_ref_node, refs);
> +
> + /* See same comments in io_sqe_files_unregister(). */
> + if (!old_ref_node->count)
> + percpu_ref_kill(data->cur_refs);
> spin_lock(&data->lock);
> list_add(&ref_node->node, &data->ref_list);
> data->cur_refs = &ref_node->refs;
>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2020-11-05 3:21 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 4+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2020-09-02 5:05 [PATCH] io_uring: don't take percpu_ref operations for registered files in IOPOLL mode Xiaoguang Wang
2020-11-05 3:20 ` Xiaoguang Wang [this message]
2020-11-09 14:41 ` Jens Axboe
2020-11-10 3:04 ` Xiaoguang Wang
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=2eb73693-9c40-d657-b822-548ddd92b875@linux.alibaba.com \
[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