From: Jens Axboe <[email protected]>
To: io-uring <[email protected]>
Subject: [PATCH v3] io_uring: improve task work cache utilization
Date: Thu, 24 Mar 2022 17:10:12 -0600 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <[email protected]> (raw)
While profiling task_work intensive workloads, I noticed that most of
the time in tctx_task_work() is spending stalled on loading 'req'. This
is one of the unfortunate side effects of using linked lists,
particularly when they end up being passe around.
Prefetch the next request, if there is one. There's a sufficient amount
of work in between that this makes it available for the next loop.
While fiddling with the cache layout, move the link outside of the
hot completion cacheline. It's rarely used in hot workloads, so better
to bring in kbuf which is used for networked loads with provided buffers.
This reduces tctx_task_work() overhead from ~3% to 1-1.5% in my testing.
Signed-off-by: Jens Axboe <[email protected]>
---
v3 - apparently it's nicely documented that prefetch need not be a valid
address, so just get rid of the next checking for it
diff --git a/fs/io_uring.c b/fs/io_uring.c
index a76e91fe277c..bb40c80fd9ca 100644
--- a/fs/io_uring.c
+++ b/fs/io_uring.c
@@ -928,7 +928,6 @@ struct io_kiocb {
struct io_wq_work_node comp_list;
atomic_t refs;
atomic_t poll_refs;
- struct io_kiocb *link;
struct io_task_work io_task_work;
/* for polled requests, i.e. IORING_OP_POLL_ADD and async armed poll */
struct hlist_node hash_node;
@@ -939,6 +938,7 @@ struct io_kiocb {
/* custom credentials, valid IFF REQ_F_CREDS is set */
/* stores selected buf, valid IFF REQ_F_BUFFER_SELECTED is set */
struct io_buffer *kbuf;
+ struct io_kiocb *link;
const struct cred *creds;
struct io_wq_work work;
};
@@ -2451,6 +2451,8 @@ static void handle_prev_tw_list(struct io_wq_work_node *node,
struct io_kiocb *req = container_of(node, struct io_kiocb,
io_task_work.node);
+ prefetch(container_of(next, struct io_kiocb, io_task_work.node));
+
if (req->ctx != *ctx) {
if (unlikely(!*uring_locked && *ctx))
ctx_commit_and_unlock(*ctx);
@@ -2483,6 +2485,8 @@ static void handle_tw_list(struct io_wq_work_node *node,
struct io_kiocb *req = container_of(node, struct io_kiocb,
io_task_work.node);
+ prefetch(container_of(next, struct io_kiocb, io_task_work.node));
+
if (req->ctx != *ctx) {
ctx_flush_and_put(*ctx, locked);
*ctx = req->ctx;
--
Jens Axboe
reply other threads:[~2022-03-24 23:10 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: [no followups] expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed
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] \
/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