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=-2.3 required=3.0 tests=DKIM_SIGNED,DKIM_VALID, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS, USER_AGENT_SANE_1 autolearn=no 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 7AED5C4332B for ; Mon, 23 Mar 2020 14:26:04 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4EB32206F8 for ; Mon, 23 Mar 2020 14:26:04 +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="CnHY57/c" Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1725866AbgCWO0E (ORCPT ); Mon, 23 Mar 2020 10:26:04 -0400 Received: from mail-pf1-f196.google.com ([209.85.210.196]:42548 "EHLO mail-pf1-f196.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1725839AbgCWO0D (ORCPT ); Mon, 23 Mar 2020 10:26:03 -0400 Received: by mail-pf1-f196.google.com with SMTP id 22so3958969pfa.9 for ; Mon, 23 Mar 2020 07:26:03 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=kernel-dk.20150623.gappssmtp.com; s=20150623; h=subject:to:references:from:message-id:date:user-agent:mime-version :in-reply-to:content-language:content-transfer-encoding; bh=gyVFtIAdfxxiuKfx8+zJgTL9jcPcCuD4xyjjj0KliPs=; b=CnHY57/ca86uVMekD6N3Ny53hrNuxe4odiTn0RFDYZ0Y0mm2nIxe+kxrn3f9Boi2hj gdOqFdv2P2UZFyLkTu/uGF0YCjWKZQe1v+qQ1DuaXUFBBljnMTMMrIOqTElIVR+z0qAy jgNLUEeI8s47KOhznH3X858mVXYEzxKKxRlEsp7prVW3nIU4EoZk5e8WL5Z2xD0sp5Z+ qybiCLg6hyiHdcx/pgsQrJ97Od3auJ32eO8vPfmuhSU4FXXnJW021aSDQhYW4zcto4GV 4nsmIlPuInr89AZsUZNBj+d1ZWDKk6PfhIbaxVla1pMxcnzoVwFohnb3MJEg3UkkzgnZ QBaw== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:subject:to:references:from:message-id:date :user-agent:mime-version:in-reply-to:content-language :content-transfer-encoding; bh=gyVFtIAdfxxiuKfx8+zJgTL9jcPcCuD4xyjjj0KliPs=; b=Xgs8alFIyvOENrjZEws+UkUv0HbSlEyFvtWULPCQauvB58XT94zQCFRigETtrjR3HW CpJjqPE98wfnJfHKl8+HDJTioJ5nt1o8c0DxAr4mwHsjDJKCvVAe/EKNhwValKVgIDpd W3Gwv50n8V9fgl67WPyda0JJlDWGFvB24LuPjrpKcglZ0jHYg2QYV6Ayx3NYvKDkqBHb W0JO0wD/n5MU0YNWoz7rxKkKOPZ+OFyFEIvwNfbAImI/yNo2fR5dA9tHlRi6EgzTtER7 Tc2eUsb1NRUH1lxDTvvEaAisUn3A0adqcccUfVt5Is+3CV60MDtucQFhkOY5tgoKlfYb YoSA== X-Gm-Message-State: ANhLgQ0+i224e1Uop9l3JRtzFQdY36lmzANf5DfnYzK0xw2MK0zHyDTU 3QObbmNb4p1TWzXUfaj2F2vPdBKGL4magA== X-Google-Smtp-Source: ADFU+vuVG3gBwPFElTeDuxB+2JMCHW0iXFiE6p4I9CwD1mqp2tRM+40+5hNTHI5OEsJUH5pYQPZisQ== X-Received: by 2002:a65:494f:: with SMTP id q15mr22381358pgs.383.1584973562272; Mon, 23 Mar 2020 07:26:02 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [192.168.1.188] ([66.219.217.145]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id bx1sm12738920pjb.5.2020.03.23.07.26.01 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 bits=128/128); Mon, 23 Mar 2020 07:26:01 -0700 (PDT) Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] io-wq: handle hashed writes in chains To: Pavel Begunkov , io-uring References: <3454f8c1-3d5a-1f94-569a-41e553fc836a@gmail.com> From: Jens Axboe Message-ID: <3b977334-e4d4-b19a-01c9-631e2a52614f@kernel.dk> Date: Mon, 23 Mar 2020 08:26:00 -0600 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:68.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/68.4.1 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: 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 3/23/20 2:38 AM, Pavel Begunkov wrote: >> No, and in fact it probably should be a separate thing, but I kind of >> like your approach so not moving forward with mine. I do think it's >> worth looking into separately, as there's no reason why we can't wake a >> non-hashed worker if we're just doing hashed work from the existing >> thread. If that thread is just doing copies and not blocking, the >> unhashed (or next hashed) work is just sitting idle while it could be >> running instead. > > Then, I'll clean the diff, hopefully soon. Could I steal parts of your patch > description? Of course, go ahead. >> Hence I added that hunk, to kick a new worker to proceed in parallel. > > It seems, I need to take a closer look at this accounting in general. Agree, I think we have some room for improvement there. -- Jens Axboe