From: Jens Axboe <[email protected]>
To: "[email protected]" <[email protected]>,
Damien Le Moal <[email protected]>
Cc: Kanchan Joshi <[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]" <[email protected]>,
"[email protected]" <[email protected]>,
"[email protected]" <[email protected]>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/3] io_uring: add support for zone-append
Date: Fri, 19 Jun 2020 08:15:01 -0600 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <[email protected]> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <[email protected]>
On 6/19/20 3:41 AM, [email protected] wrote:
> Jens,
>
> Would you have time to answer a question below in this thread?
>
> On 18.06.2020 11:11, [email protected] wrote:
>> On 18.06.2020 08:47, Damien Le Moal wrote:
>>> On 2020/06/18 17:35, [email protected] wrote:
>>>> On 18.06.2020 07:39, Damien Le Moal wrote:
>>>>> On 2020/06/18 2:27, Kanchan Joshi wrote:
>>>>>> From: Selvakumar S <[email protected]>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Introduce three new opcodes for zone-append -
>>>>>>
>>>>>> IORING_OP_ZONE_APPEND : non-vectord, similiar to IORING_OP_WRITE
>>>>>> IORING_OP_ZONE_APPENDV : vectored, similar to IORING_OP_WRITEV
>>>>>> IORING_OP_ZONE_APPEND_FIXED : append using fixed-buffers
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Repurpose cqe->flags to return zone-relative offset.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Signed-off-by: SelvaKumar S <[email protected]>
>>>>>> Signed-off-by: Kanchan Joshi <[email protected]>
>>>>>> Signed-off-by: Nitesh Shetty <[email protected]>
>>>>>> Signed-off-by: Javier Gonzalez <[email protected]>
>>>>>> ---
>>>>>> fs/io_uring.c | 72 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++--
>>>>>> include/uapi/linux/io_uring.h | 8 ++++-
>>>>>> 2 files changed, 77 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
>>>>>>
>>>>>> diff --git a/fs/io_uring.c b/fs/io_uring.c
>>>>>> index 155f3d8..c14c873 100644
>>>>>> --- a/fs/io_uring.c
>>>>>> +++ b/fs/io_uring.c
>>>>>> @@ -649,6 +649,10 @@ struct io_kiocb {
>>>>>> unsigned long fsize;
>>>>>> u64 user_data;
>>>>>> u32 result;
>>>>>> +#ifdef CONFIG_BLK_DEV_ZONED
>>>>>> + /* zone-relative offset for append, in bytes */
>>>>>> + u32 append_offset;
>>>>>
>>>>> this can overflow. u64 is needed.
>>>>
>>>> We chose to do it this way to start with because struct io_uring_cqe
>>>> only has space for u32 when we reuse the flags.
>>>>
>>>> We can of course create a new cqe structure, but that will come with
>>>> larger changes to io_uring for supporting append.
>>>>
>>>> Do you believe this is a better approach?
>>>
>>> The problem is that zone size are 32 bits in the kernel, as a number
>>> of sectors. So any device that has a zone size smaller or equal to
>>> 2^31 512B sectors can be accepted. Using a zone relative offset in
>>> bytes for returning zone append result is OK-ish, but to match the
>>> kernel supported range of possible zone size, you need 31+9 bits...
>>> 32 does not cut it.
>>
>> Agree. Our initial assumption was that u32 would cover current zone size
>> requirements, but if this is a no-go, we will take the longer path.
>
> Converting to u64 will require a new version of io_uring_cqe, where we
> extend at least 32 bits. I believe this will need a whole new allocation
> and probably ioctl().
>
> Is this an acceptable change for you? We will of course add support for
> liburing when we agree on the right way to do this.
If you need 64-bit of return value, then it's not going to work. Even
with the existing patches, reusing cqe->flags isn't going to fly, as
it would conflict with eg doing zone append writes with automatic
buffer selection.
We're not changing the io_uring_cqe. It's important to keep it lean, and
any other request type is generally fine with 64-bit tag + 32-bit result
(and 32-bit flags on the side) for completions.
Only viable alternative I see would be to provide an area to store this
information, and pass in a pointer to this at submission time through
the sqe. One issue I do see with that is if we only have this
information available at completion time, then we'd need some async punt
to copy it to user space... Generally not ideal.
A hackier approach would be to play some tricks with cqe->res and
cqe->flags, setting aside a flag to denote an extension of cqe->res.
That would mean excluding zone append (etc) from using buffer selection,
which probably isn't a huge deal. It'd be more problematic for any other
future flags. But if you just need 40 bits, then it could certainly
work. Rigth now, if cqe->flags & 1 is set, then (cqe->flags >> 16) is
the buffer ID. You could define IORING_CQE_F_ZONE_FOO to be bit 1, so
that:
uint64_t val = cqe->res; // assuming non-error here
if (cqe->flags & IORING_CQE_F_ZONE_FOO)
val |= (cqe->flags >> 16) << 32ULL;
and hence use the upper 16 bits of cqe->flags for the upper bits of your
(then) 48-bit total value.
--
Jens Axboe
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2020-06-19 14:15 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 40+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
[not found] <CGME20200617172653epcas5p488de50090415eb802e62acc0e23d8812@epcas5p4.samsung.com>
2020-06-17 17:23 ` [PATCH 0/3] zone-append support in aio and io-uring Kanchan Joshi
[not found] ` <CGME20200617172702epcas5p4dbf4729d31d9a85ab1d261d04f238e61@epcas5p4.samsung.com>
2020-06-17 17:23 ` [PATCH 1/3] fs,block: Introduce IOCB_ZONE_APPEND and direct-io handling Kanchan Joshi
2020-06-17 19:02 ` Pavel Begunkov
2020-06-18 7:16 ` Damien Le Moal
2020-06-18 18:35 ` Kanchan Joshi
[not found] ` <CGME20200617172706epcas5p4dcbc164063f58bad95b211b9d6dfbfa9@epcas5p4.samsung.com>
2020-06-17 17:23 ` [PATCH 2/3] aio: add support for zone-append Kanchan Joshi
2020-06-18 7:33 ` Damien Le Moal
[not found] ` <CGME20200617172713epcas5p352f2907a12bd4ee3c97be1c7d8e1569e@epcas5p3.samsung.com>
2020-06-17 17:23 ` [PATCH 3/3] io_uring: " Kanchan Joshi
2020-06-17 18:55 ` Pavel Begunkov
2020-06-18 7:39 ` Damien Le Moal
2020-06-18 8:35 ` [email protected]
2020-06-18 8:47 ` Damien Le Moal
2020-06-18 9:11 ` [email protected]
2020-06-19 9:41 ` [email protected]
2020-06-19 11:15 ` Matias Bjørling
2020-06-19 14:18 ` Jens Axboe
2020-06-19 15:14 ` Matias Bjørling
2020-06-19 15:20 ` Jens Axboe
2020-06-19 15:40 ` Matias Bjørling
2020-06-19 15:44 ` Jens Axboe
2020-06-21 18:55 ` [email protected]
2020-06-19 14:15 ` Jens Axboe [this message]
2020-06-19 14:59 ` Pavel Begunkov
2020-06-19 15:02 ` Jens Axboe
2020-06-21 18:52 ` [email protected]
2020-06-17 17:42 ` [PATCH 0/3] zone-append support in aio and io-uring Matthew Wilcox
2020-06-18 6:56 ` Christoph Hellwig
2020-06-18 8:29 ` Javier González
2020-06-18 17:52 ` Kanchan Joshi
2020-06-19 3:08 ` Damien Le Moal
2020-06-19 7:56 ` Christoph Hellwig
2020-06-18 8:04 ` Matias Bjørling
2020-06-18 8:27 ` Javier González
2020-06-18 8:32 ` Matias Bjørling
2020-06-18 8:39 ` Javier González
2020-06-18 8:46 ` Matias Bjørling
2020-06-18 14:16 ` Christoph Hellwig
2020-06-18 19:21 ` Kanchan Joshi
2020-06-18 20:04 ` Matias Bjørling
2020-06-19 1:03 ` Damien Le Moal
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