From: Xiaoguang Wang <[email protected]>
To: Pavel Begunkov <[email protected]>,
Jens Axboe <[email protected]>,
[email protected]
Cc: [email protected]
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 1/2] io_uring: avoid whole io_wq_work copy for requests completed inline
Date: Mon, 1 Jun 2020 00:15:10 +0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <[email protected]> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <[email protected]>
hi,
>>> diff --git a/fs/io_uring.c b/fs/io_uring.c
>>> index 12296ce3e8b9..2a3a02838f7b 100644
>>> --- a/fs/io_uring.c
>>> +++ b/fs/io_uring.c
>>> @@ -907,9 +907,10 @@ static void io_file_put_work(struct work_struct *work);
>>> static inline void io_req_init_async(struct io_kiocb *req,
>>> void (*func)(struct io_wq_work **))
>>> {
>>> - if (req->flags & REQ_F_WORK_INITIALIZED)
>>> - req->work.func = func;
>>> - else {
>>> + if (req->flags & REQ_F_WORK_INITIALIZED) {
>>> + if (!req->work.func)
>>> + req->work.func = func;
>>> + } else {
>>> req->work = (struct io_wq_work){ .func = func };
>>> req->flags |= REQ_F_WORK_INITIALIZED;
>>> }
>>> @@ -2920,6 +2921,8 @@ static int __io_splice_prep(struct io_kiocb *req,
>>> return ret;
>>> req->flags |= REQ_F_NEED_CLEANUP;
>>>
>>> + /* Splice will be punted aync, so initialize io_wq_work firstly_*/
>>> + io_req_init_async(req, io_wq_submit_work);
>>> if (!S_ISREG(file_inode(sp->file_in)->i_mode))
>>> req->work.flags |= IO_WQ_WORK_UNBOUND;
>>>
>>> @@ -3592,6 +3595,9 @@ static int io_statx(struct io_kiocb *req, bool force_nonblock)
>>>
>>> static int io_close_prep(struct io_kiocb *req, const struct io_uring_sqe *sqe)
>>> {
>>> + /* Close may be punted aync, so initialize io_wq_work firstly */
>>> + io_req_init_async(req, io_wq_submit_work);
>>> +
>> For splice and close requests, these two about io_req_init_async() calls should be
>> io_req_init_async(req, NULL), because they change req->work.flags firstly.
>
> Please no. Such assumptions/dependencies are prone to break.
> It'll get us subtle bugs in no time.
>
> BTW, why not io_wq_submit_work in place of NULL?
In the begin of __io_splice_prep or io_close_prep, current io_uring mainline codes will
modify req->work.flags firstly, so we need to call io_req_init_async to initialize
io_wq_work before the work.flags modification.
For below codes:
static inline void io_req_init_async(struct io_kiocb *req,
void (*func)(struct io_wq_work **))
{
if (req->flags & REQ_F_WORK_INITIALIZED) {
if (!req->work.func)
req->work.func = func;
} else {
req->work = (struct io_wq_work){ .func = func };
req->flags |= REQ_F_WORK_INITIALIZED;
}
}
if we not pass NULL to parameter 'func', e.g. pass io_wq_submit_work, then
we can not use io_req_init_async() to pass io_close_finish again.
Now I'm confused how to write better codes based on current io_uring mainline codes :)
If you have some free time, please have a deeper look, thanks.
Regards,
Xiaoguang Wang
>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2020-05-31 16:16 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 27+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2020-05-30 14:39 [PATCH v4 1/2] io_uring: avoid whole io_wq_work copy for requests completed inline Xiaoguang Wang
2020-05-30 14:39 ` [PATCH v4 2/2] io_uring: avoid unnecessary io_wq_work copy for fast poll feature Xiaoguang Wang
2020-05-30 16:44 ` [PATCH v4 1/2] io_uring: avoid whole io_wq_work copy for requests completed inline Jens Axboe
2020-05-30 17:14 ` Jens Axboe
2020-05-30 17:29 ` Jens Axboe
2020-05-30 17:36 ` Pavel Begunkov
2020-05-31 13:57 ` Xiaoguang Wang
2020-05-31 14:49 ` Pavel Begunkov
2020-05-31 14:12 ` Xiaoguang Wang
2020-05-31 14:31 ` Xiaoguang Wang
2020-05-31 14:57 ` Pavel Begunkov
2020-05-31 16:15 ` Xiaoguang Wang [this message]
2020-06-01 10:43 ` Pavel Begunkov
2020-06-01 11:50 ` Xiaoguang Wang
2020-06-01 4:56 ` [PATCH v5 " Xiaoguang Wang
2020-06-01 4:56 ` [PATCH v5 2/2] io_uring: avoid unnecessary io_wq_work copy for fast poll feature Xiaoguang Wang
2020-06-02 1:16 ` Xiaoguang Wang
2020-06-03 13:46 ` Pavel Begunkov
2020-06-07 15:02 ` Jens Axboe
2020-06-07 20:36 ` Pavel Begunkov
2020-06-07 20:57 ` Pavel Begunkov
2020-06-07 23:29 ` Jens Axboe
2020-06-08 7:43 ` Pavel Begunkov
2020-06-08 12:14 ` Xiaoguang Wang
2020-06-08 20:08 ` Jens Axboe
2020-06-07 23:26 ` Jens Axboe
2020-05-31 14:33 ` [PATCH v4 1/2] io_uring: avoid whole io_wq_work copy for requests completed inline 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=4de0ccd2-249f-26af-d815-6dba1b86b25a@linux.alibaba.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