From: Pavel Begunkov <[email protected]>
To: Usama Arif <[email protected]>,
Jens Axboe <[email protected]>,
[email protected], [email protected]
Cc: [email protected]
Subject: Re: [External] Re: [RFC] io_uring: avoid ring quiesce while registering/unregistering eventfd
Date: Thu, 3 Feb 2022 15:44:21 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <[email protected]> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <[email protected]>
On 2/3/22 15:14, Usama Arif wrote:
> On 02/02/2022 19:18, Jens Axboe wrote:
>> On 2/2/22 9:57 AM, Jens Axboe wrote:
>>> On 2/2/22 8:59 AM, Usama Arif wrote:
>>>> Acquire completion_lock at the start of __io_uring_register before
>>>> registering/unregistering eventfd and release it at the end. Hence
>>>> all calls to io_cqring_ev_posted which adds to the eventfd counter
>>>> will finish before acquiring the spin_lock in io_uring_register, and
>>>> all new calls will wait till the eventfd is registered. This avoids
>>>> ring quiesce which is much more expensive than acquiring the
>>>> spin_lock.
>>>>
>>>> On the system tested with this patch, io_uring_reigster with
>>>> IORING_REGISTER_EVENTFD takes less than 1ms, compared to 15ms before.
>>>
>>> This seems like optimizing for the wrong thing, so I've got a few
>>> questions. Are you doing a lot of eventfd registrations (and
>>> unregister) in your workload? Or is it just the initial pain of
>>> registering one? In talking to Pavel, he suggested that RCU might be a
>>> good use case here, and I think so too. That would still remove the
>>> need to quiesce, and the posted side just needs a fairly cheap rcu
>>> read lock/unlock around it.
>>
>> Totally untested, but perhaps can serve as a starting point or
>> inspiration.
>>
>
> Hi,
>
> Thank you for the replies and comments. My usecase registers only one eventfd at the start.
Then it's overkill. Update io_register_op_must_quiesce(), set ->cq_ev_fd
on registration with WRITE_ONCE(), read it in io_cqring_ev_posted* with
READ_ONCE() and you're set.
There is a caveat, ->cq_ev_fd won't be immediately visible to already
inflight requests, but we can say it's the responsibility of the
userspace to wait for a grace period, i.e. for all inflight requests
submitted before registration io_cqring_ev_posted* might or might not
see updated ->cq_ev_fd, which works perfectly if there was no requests
in the first place. Of course it changes the behaviour so will need
a new register opcode.
--
Pavel Begunkov
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2022-02-03 15:48 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 8+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2022-02-02 15:59 [RFC] io_uring: avoid ring quiesce while registering/unregistering eventfd Usama Arif
2022-02-02 16:57 ` Jens Axboe
2022-02-02 18:32 ` Pavel Begunkov
2022-02-02 18:39 ` Pavel Begunkov
2022-02-02 19:18 ` Jens Axboe
2022-02-03 15:14 ` [External] " Usama Arif
2022-02-03 15:44 ` Pavel Begunkov [this message]
2022-02-03 15:55 ` 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 \
[email protected] \
[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