public inbox for [email protected]
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Pavel Begunkov <[email protected]>
To: Ming Lei <[email protected]>
Cc: Jens Axboe <[email protected]>,
	[email protected], [email protected],
	Kevin Wolf <[email protected]>
Subject: Re: [PATCH V5 4/8] io_uring: support SQE group
Date: Tue, 10 Sep 2024 14:12:53 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <[email protected]> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <ZtweiCfLOJmdeY0Z@fedora>

On 9/7/24 10:36, Ming Lei wrote:
...
>>> Wrt. ublk, group provides zero copy, and the ublk io(group) is generic
>>> IO, sometime IO_LINK is really needed & helpful, such as in ublk-nbd,
>>> send(tcp) requests need to be linked & zc. And we shouldn't limit IO_LINK
>>> for generic io_uring IO.
>>>
>>>> from nuances as such, which would be quite hard to track, the semantics
>>>> of IOSQE_CQE_SKIP_SUCCESS is unclear.
>>>
>>> IO group just follows every normal request.
>>
>> It tries to mimic but groups don't and essentially can't do it the
>> same way, at least in some aspects. E.g. IOSQE_CQE_SKIP_SUCCESS
>> usually means that all following will be silenced. What if a
>> member is CQE_SKIP, should it stop the leader from posting a CQE?
>> And whatever the answer is, it'll be different from the link's
>> behaviour.
> 
> Here it looks easier than link's:
> 
> - only leader's IOSQE_CQE_SKIP_SUCCESS follows linked request's rule
> - all members just respects the flag for its own, and not related with
> leader's
> 
>>
>> Regardless, let's forbid IOSQE_CQE_SKIP_SUCCESS and linked timeouts
>> for groups, that can be discussed afterwards.
> 
> It should easy to forbid IOSQE_CQE_SKIP_SUCCESS which is per-sqe, will do
> it in V6.
> 
> I am not sure if it is easy to disallow IORING_OP_LINK_TIMEOUT, which
> covers all linked sqes, and group leader could be just one of them.
> Can you share any idea about the implementation to forbid LINK_TIMEOUT
> for sqe group?

diff --git a/io_uring/timeout.c b/io_uring/timeout.c
index 671d6093bf36..83b5fd64b4e9 100644
--- a/io_uring/timeout.c
+++ b/io_uring/timeout.c
@@ -542,6 +542,9 @@ static int __io_timeout_prep(struct io_kiocb *req,
  	data->mode = io_translate_timeout_mode(flags);
  	hrtimer_init(&data->timer, io_timeout_get_clock(data), data->mode);
  
+	if (is_timeout_link && req->ctx->submit_state.group.head)
+		return -EINVAL;
+
  	if (is_timeout_link) {
  		struct io_submit_link *link = &req->ctx->submit_state.link;
  

This should do, they already look into the ctx's link list. Just move
it into the "if (is_timeout_link)" block.


>>> 1) fail in linked chain
>>> - follows IO_LINK's behavior since io_fail_links() covers io group
>>>
>>> 2) otherwise
>>> - just respect IOSQE_CQE_SKIP_SUCCESS
>>>
>>>> And also it doen't work with IORING_OP_LINK_TIMEOUT.
>>>
>>> REQ_F_LINK_TIMEOUT can work on whole group(or group leader) only, and I
>>> will document it in V6.
>>
>> It would still be troublesome. When a linked timeout fires it searches
>> for the request it's attached to and cancels it, however, group leaders
>> that queued up their members are discoverable. But let's say you can find
>> them in some way, then the only sensbile thing to do is cancel members,
>> which should be doable by checking req->grp_leader, but might be easier
>> to leave it to follow up patches.
> 
> We have changed sqe group to start queuing members after leader is
> completed. link timeout will cancel leader with all its members via
> leader->grp_link, this behavior should respect IORING_OP_LINK_TIMEOUT
> completely.
> 
> Please see io_fail_links() and io_cancel_group_members().
> 
>>
>>
>>>>> +
>>>>> +		lead->grp_refs += 1;
>>>>> +		group->last->grp_link = req;
>>>>> +		group->last = req;
>>>>> +
>>>>> +		if (req->flags & REQ_F_SQE_GROUP)
>>>>> +			return NULL;
>>>>> +
>>>>> +		req->grp_link = NULL;
>>>>> +		req->flags |= REQ_F_SQE_GROUP;
>>>>> +		group->head = NULL;
>>>>> +		if (lead->flags & REQ_F_FAIL) {
>>>>> +			io_queue_sqe_fallback(lead);
>>>>
>>>> Let's say the group was in the middle of a link, it'll
>>>> complete that group and continue with assembling / executing
>>>> the link when it should've failed it and honoured the
>>>> request order.
>>>
>>> OK, here we can simply remove the above two lines, and link submit
>>> state can handle this failure in link chain.
>>
>> If you just delete then nobody would check for REQ_F_FAIL and
>> fail the request.
> 
> io_link_assembling() & io_link_sqe() checks for REQ_F_FAIL and call
> io_queue_sqe_fallback() either if it is in link chain or
> not.

The case we're talking about is failing a group, which is
also in the middle of a link.

LINK_HEAD -> {GROUP_LEAD, GROUP_MEMBER}

Let's say GROUP_MEMBER fails and sets REQ_F_FAIL to the lead,
then in v5 does:

if (lead->flags & REQ_F_FAIL) {
	io_queue_sqe_fallback(lead);
	return NULL;
}

In which case it posts cqes for GROUP_LEAD and GROUP_MEMBER,
and then try to execute LINK_HEAD (without failing it), which
is wrong. So first we need:

if (state.linked_link.head)
	req_fail_link_node(state.linked_link.head);

And then we can't just remove io_queue_sqe_fallback(), because
when a group is not linked there would be no io_link_sqe()
to fail it. You can do:


io_group_sqe()
{
	if ((lead->flags & REQ_F_FAIL) && !ctx->state.link.head) {
		io_queue_sqe_fallback(lead);
		return NULL;
	}
	...
}

but it's much cleaner to move REQ_F_FAIL out of group assembling.
We'd also want to move same REQ_F_FAIL / io_queue_sqe_fallback()
out of io_link_sqe(), but I didn't mentioned because it's not
strictly required for your set AFAIR.


>> Assuming you'd also set the fail flag to the
>> link head when appropriate, how about deleting these two line
>> and do like below? (can be further prettified)
>>
>>
>> bool io_group_assembling()
>> {
>> 	return state->group.head || (req->flags & REQ_F_SQE_GROUP);
>> }
>> bool io_link_assembling()
>> {
>> 	return state->link.head || (req->flags & IO_REQ_LINK_FLAGS);
>> }
>>
>> static inline int io_submit_sqe()
>> {
>> 	...
>> 	if (unlikely(io_link_assembling(state, req) ||
>> 				 io_group_assembling(state, req) ||
>> 				 req->flags & REQ_F_FAIL)) {
>> 		if (io_group_assembling(state, req)) {
>> 			req = io_group_sqe(&state->group, req);
>> 			if (!req)
>> 				return 0;
>> 		}
>> 		if (io_link_assembling(state, req)) {
>> 			req = io_link_sqe(&state->link, req);
>> 			if (!req)
>> 				return 0;
>> 		}
>> 		if (req->flags & REQ_F_FAIL) {
>> 			io_queue_sqe_fallback(req);
>> 			return 0;
> 
> As I mentioned above, io_link_assembling() & io_link_sqe() covers
> the failure handling.

-- 
Pavel Begunkov

  reply	other threads:[~2024-09-10 13:12 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 19+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2024-08-08 16:24 [PATCH V5 0/8] io_uring: support sqe group and provide group kbuf Ming Lei
2024-08-08 16:24 ` [PATCH V5 1/8] io_uring: add io_link_req() helper Ming Lei
2024-08-08 16:24 ` [PATCH V5 2/8] io_uring: add io_submit_fail_link() helper Ming Lei
2024-08-08 16:24 ` [PATCH V5 3/8] io_uring: add helper of io_req_commit_cqe() Ming Lei
2024-08-08 16:24 ` [PATCH V5 4/8] io_uring: support SQE group Ming Lei
2024-08-27 15:18   ` Pavel Begunkov
2024-08-29  4:29     ` Ming Lei
2024-09-06 17:15       ` Pavel Begunkov
2024-09-07  9:36         ` Ming Lei
2024-09-10 13:12           ` Pavel Begunkov [this message]
2024-09-10 15:04             ` Ming Lei
2024-09-10 20:31               ` Pavel Begunkov
2024-09-11  1:28                 ` Ming Lei
2024-08-08 16:24 ` [PATCH V5 5/8] io_uring: support sqe group with members depending on leader Ming Lei
2024-08-08 16:24 ` [PATCH V5 6/8] io_uring: support providing sqe group buffer Ming Lei
2024-08-08 16:24 ` [PATCH V5 7/8] io_uring/uring_cmd: support provide group kernel buffer Ming Lei
2024-08-08 16:24 ` [PATCH V5 8/8] ublk: support provide io buffer Ming Lei
2024-08-17  4:16 ` [PATCH V5 0/8] io_uring: support sqe group and provide group kbuf Ming Lei
2024-08-17 19:48   ` 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