From: Olivier Langlois <[email protected]>
To: Jens Axboe <[email protected]>,
Pavel Begunkov <[email protected]>,
[email protected], [email protected]
Subject: Re: [PATCH] io_uring: reduce latency by reissueing the operation
Date: Fri, 18 Jun 2021 17:38:11 -0400 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <[email protected]> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <[email protected]>
On Wed, 2021-06-16 at 06:48 -0600, Jens Axboe wrote:
> On 6/9/21 4:08 PM, Olivier Langlois wrote:
> > It is quite frequent that when an operation fails and returns
> > EAGAIN,
> > the data becomes available between that failure and the call to
> > vfs_poll() done by io_arm_poll_handler().
> >
> > Detecting the situation and reissuing the operation is much faster
> > than going ahead and push the operation to the io-wq.
>
> I think this is obviously the right thing to do, but I'm not too
> crazy
> about the 'ret' pointer passed in. We could either add a proper
> return
> type instead of the bool and use that, or put the poll-or-queue-async
> into a helper that then only needs a bool return, and use that return
> value for whether to re-issue or not.
>
> Care to send an updated variant?
>
No problem!
It is going to be pleasure to send an updated version with the
requested change!
I will take that opportunity to try out my new patch sending setup ;-)
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2021-06-18 21:38 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 12+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
[not found] <[email protected]>
2021-06-16 12:48 ` [PATCH] io_uring: reduce latency by reissueing the operation Jens Axboe
2021-06-18 21:38 ` Olivier Langlois [this message]
[not found] <[email protected]>
2021-06-10 9:03 ` Pavel Begunkov
[not found] ` <[email protected]>
2021-06-10 15:51 ` Pavel Begunkov
2021-06-10 17:56 ` Olivier Langlois
2021-06-10 19:32 ` Pavel Begunkov
2021-06-11 3:55 ` Olivier Langlois
2021-06-17 18:10 ` Pavel Begunkov
2021-06-18 22:45 ` Olivier Langlois
2021-06-20 20:55 ` Pavel Begunkov
2021-06-20 21:31 ` Olivier Langlois
2021-06-20 22:04 ` Pavel Begunkov
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=489a3a2ded1daf962b8bfa3c936e20526b975d1a.camel@trillion01.com \
[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