From: Jens Axboe <[email protected]>
To: Peter Zijlstra <[email protected]>
Cc: "Carter Li 李通洲" <[email protected]>,
"Pavel Begunkov" <[email protected]>,
io-uring <[email protected]>
Subject: Re: [ISSUE] The time cost of IOSQE_IO_LINK
Date: Mon, 17 Feb 2020 08:12:30 -0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <[email protected]> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <[email protected]>
On 2/17/20 5:09 AM, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> On Fri, Feb 14, 2020 at 01:44:32PM -0700, Jens Axboe wrote:
>
> I've not looked at git trees yet, but the below doesn't apply to
> anything I have at hand.
>
> Anyway, I think I can still make sense of it -- just a rename or two
> seems to be missing.
>
> A few notes on the below...
Thanks for continuing to look at it, while we both try and make sense of
it :-)
>> diff --git a/include/linux/sched.h b/include/linux/sched.h
>> index 04278493bf15..447b06c6bed0 100644
>> --- a/include/linux/sched.h
>> +++ b/include/linux/sched.h
>> @@ -685,6 +685,11 @@ struct task_struct {
>> #endif
>> struct sched_dl_entity dl;
>>
>> +#ifdef CONFIG_IO_URING
>> + struct list_head uring_work;
>> + raw_spinlock_t uring_lock;
>> +#endif
>> +
>
> Could we pretty please use struct callback_head for this, just like
> task_work() and RCU ? Look at task_work_add() for inspiration.
Sure, so add a new one, sched_work, and have it get this sched-in or
sched-out behavior.
Only potential hitch I see there is related to ordering, which is more
of a fairness thab correctness issue. I'm going to ignore that for now,
and we can always revisit later.
> And maybe remove the uring naming form this.
No problem
>> #ifdef CONFIG_UCLAMP_TASK
>> /* Clamp values requested for a scheduling entity */
>> struct uclamp_se uclamp_req[UCLAMP_CNT];
>> diff --git a/kernel/sched/core.c b/kernel/sched/core.c
>> index 51ca491d99ed..170fefa1caf8 100644
>> --- a/kernel/sched/core.c
>> +++ b/kernel/sched/core.c
>> @@ -2717,6 +2717,11 @@ static void __sched_fork(unsigned long clone_flags, struct task_struct *p)
>> INIT_HLIST_HEAD(&p->preempt_notifiers);
>> #endif
>>
>> +#ifdef CONFIG_IO_URING
>> + INIT_LIST_HEAD(&p->uring_work);
>> + raw_spin_lock_init(&p->uring_lock);
>> +#endif
>> +
>> #ifdef CONFIG_COMPACTION
>> p->capture_control = NULL;
>> #endif
>> @@ -4104,6 +4109,20 @@ void __noreturn do_task_dead(void)
>> cpu_relax();
>> }
>>
>> +#ifdef CONFIG_IO_URING
>> +extern void io_uring_task_handler(struct task_struct *tsk);
>> +
>> +static inline void io_uring_handler(struct task_struct *tsk)
>> +{
>> + if (!list_empty(&tsk->uring_work))
>> + io_uring_task_handler(tsk);
>> +}
>> +#else /* !CONFIG_IO_URING */
>> +static inline void io_uring_handler(struct task_struct *tsk)
>> +{
>> +}
>> +#endif
>> +
>> static void sched_out_update(struct task_struct *tsk)
>> {
>> /*
>> @@ -4121,6 +4140,7 @@ static void sched_out_update(struct task_struct *tsk)
>> io_wq_worker_sleeping(tsk);
>> preempt_enable_no_resched();
>> }
>> + io_uring_handler(tsk);
>> }
>>
>> static void sched_in_update(struct task_struct *tsk)
>> @@ -4131,6 +4151,7 @@ static void sched_in_update(struct task_struct *tsk)
>> else
>> io_wq_worker_running(tsk);
>> }
>> + io_uring_handler(tsk);
>> }
>
> The problem I have here is that we have an unconditional load of the
> cacheline that has ->uring_work in.
>
> /me curses about how nobody seems interested in building useful
> cacheline analyis tools :/
>
> Lemme see if I can find a spot for this... perhaps something like so?
>
>
>
> diff --git a/include/linux/sched.h b/include/linux/sched.h
> index 0918904c939d..4fba93293fa1 100644
> --- a/include/linux/sched.h
> +++ b/include/linux/sched.h
> @@ -649,6 +649,7 @@ struct task_struct {
> /* Per task flags (PF_*), defined further below: */
> unsigned int flags;
> unsigned int ptrace;
> + int on_rq;
>
> #ifdef CONFIG_SMP
> struct llist_node wake_entry;
> @@ -671,14 +672,16 @@ struct task_struct {
> int recent_used_cpu;
> int wake_cpu;
> #endif
> - int on_rq;
>
> int prio;
> int static_prio;
> int normal_prio;
> unsigned int rt_priority;
>
> + struct callbach_head *sched_work;
> +
> const struct sched_class *sched_class;
> +
> struct sched_entity se;
> struct sched_rt_entity rt;
> #ifdef CONFIG_CGROUP_SCHED
Thanks, I'll kick off the series with doing it based on this instead.
--
Jens Axboe
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2020-02-17 16:13 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 59+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2020-02-12 16:31 [ISSUE] The time cost of IOSQE_IO_LINK Carter Li 李通洲
2020-02-12 17:11 ` Jens Axboe
2020-02-12 17:22 ` Jens Axboe
2020-02-12 17:29 ` Jens Axboe
2020-02-13 0:33 ` Carter Li 李通洲
2020-02-13 15:08 ` Pavel Begunkov
2020-02-13 15:14 ` Jens Axboe
2020-02-13 15:51 ` Carter Li 李通洲
2020-02-14 1:25 ` Carter Li 李通洲
2020-02-14 2:45 ` Jens Axboe
2020-02-14 5:03 ` Jens Axboe
2020-02-14 15:32 ` Peter Zijlstra
2020-02-14 15:47 ` Jens Axboe
2020-02-14 16:18 ` Jens Axboe
2020-02-14 17:52 ` Jens Axboe
2020-02-14 20:44 ` Jens Axboe
2020-02-15 0:16 ` Carter Li 李通洲
2020-02-15 1:10 ` Jens Axboe
2020-02-15 1:25 ` Carter Li 李通洲
2020-02-15 1:27 ` Jens Axboe
2020-02-15 6:01 ` Jens Axboe
2020-02-15 6:32 ` Carter Li 李通洲
2020-02-15 15:11 ` Jens Axboe
2020-02-16 19:06 ` Pavel Begunkov
2020-02-16 22:23 ` Jens Axboe
2020-02-17 10:30 ` Pavel Begunkov
2020-02-17 19:30 ` Jens Axboe
2020-02-16 23:06 ` Jens Axboe
2020-02-16 23:07 ` Jens Axboe
2020-02-17 12:09 ` Peter Zijlstra
2020-02-17 16:12 ` Jens Axboe [this message]
2020-02-17 17:16 ` Jens Axboe
2020-02-17 17:46 ` Peter Zijlstra
2020-02-17 18:16 ` Jens Axboe
2020-02-18 13:13 ` Peter Zijlstra
2020-02-18 14:27 ` [PATCH] asm-generic/atomic: Add try_cmpxchg() fallbacks Peter Zijlstra
2020-02-18 14:40 ` Peter Zijlstra
2020-02-20 10:30 ` Will Deacon
2020-02-20 10:37 ` Peter Zijlstra
2020-02-20 10:39 ` Will Deacon
2020-02-18 14:56 ` [ISSUE] The time cost of IOSQE_IO_LINK Oleg Nesterov
2020-02-18 15:07 ` Oleg Nesterov
2020-02-18 15:38 ` Peter Zijlstra
2020-02-18 16:33 ` Jens Axboe
2020-02-18 15:07 ` Peter Zijlstra
2020-02-18 15:50 ` [PATCH] task_work_run: don't take ->pi_lock unconditionally Oleg Nesterov
2020-02-20 16:39 ` Peter Zijlstra
2020-02-20 17:22 ` Oleg Nesterov
2020-02-20 17:49 ` Peter Zijlstra
2020-02-21 14:52 ` Oleg Nesterov
2020-02-24 18:47 ` Jens Axboe
2020-02-28 19:17 ` Jens Axboe
2020-02-28 19:25 ` Peter Zijlstra
2020-02-28 19:28 ` Jens Axboe
2020-02-28 20:06 ` Peter Zijlstra
2020-02-28 20:15 ` Jens Axboe
2020-02-18 16:46 ` [ISSUE] The time cost of IOSQE_IO_LINK Jens Axboe
2020-02-18 16:52 ` Jens Axboe
2020-02-18 13:13 ` Peter Zijlstra
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] \
/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