From: Pavel Begunkov <[email protected]>
To: Dylan Yudaken <[email protected]>,
"[email protected]" <[email protected]>
Cc: "[email protected]" <[email protected]>, "[email protected]" <[email protected]>
Subject: Re: [RFC 2/2] io_uring/net: allow to override notification tag
Date: Wed, 17 Aug 2022 13:44:07 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <[email protected]> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <[email protected]>
On 8/17/22 13:04, Dylan Yudaken wrote:
> On Wed, 2022-08-17 at 11:48 +0100, Pavel Begunkov wrote:
>> On 8/16/22 09:37, Dylan Yudaken wrote:
>>> On Tue, 2022-08-16 at 08:42 +0100, Pavel Begunkov wrote:
>>>> Considering limited amount of slots some users struggle with
>>>> registration time notification tag assignment as it's hard to
>>>> manage
>>>> notifications using sequence numbers. Add a simple feature that
>>>> copies
>>>> sqe->user_data of a send(+flush) request into the notification
>>>> CQE it
>>>> flushes (and only when it's flushes).
>>>
>>> I think for this to be useful I think it would also be needed to
>>> have
>>> flags on the generated CQE.
>>>
>>> If there are more CQEs coming for the same request it should have
>>> IORING_CQE_F_MORE set. Otherwise user space would not be able to
>>> know
>>> if it is able to reuse local data.
>>
>> If you want to have:
>>
>> expect_more = cqe->flags & IORING_CQE_F_MORE;
>>
>> Then in the current form you can perfectly do that with
>>
>> // MSG_WAITALL
>> expect_more = (cqe->res == io_len);
>> // !MSG_WAITALL,
>> expect_more = (cqe->res >= 0);
>>
>> But might be more convenient to have IORING_CQE_F_MORE set,
>> one problem is a slight change of (implicit) semantics, i.e.
>> we don't execute linked requests when filling a IORING_CQE_F_MORE
>> CQE + CQE ordering implied from that.
>>
>> It's maybe worth to not rely on the link failing concept for
>> deciding whether to flush or not.
>
> Is the ordering guaranteed then to be <send cqe>, <notif cqe>?
Not yet, need to send this patch
https://github.com/isilence/linux/commit/9a1464905be3fc0cee4f68b01e43c5ad14a05b06
> If so I would put the IORING_CQE_F_MORE more as a nice to have for
> consistency with other ops
>
>>
>>
>>> Additionally it would need to provide a way of disambiguating the
>>> send
>>> CQE with the flush CQE.
>>
>> Do you mean like IORING_CQE_F_NOTIF from 1/2?
>>
>
> Apologies - I missed that
>
--
Pavel Begunkov
prev parent reply other threads:[~2022-08-17 12:46 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 14+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2022-08-16 7:41 [RFC 0/2] io_uring zc notification tag override Pavel Begunkov
2022-08-16 7:42 ` [RFC 1/2] io_uring/notif: change notif CQE uapi format Pavel Begunkov
2022-08-16 8:14 ` Stefan Metzmacher
2022-08-16 7:42 ` [RFC 2/2] io_uring/net: allow to override notification tag Pavel Begunkov
2022-08-16 8:23 ` Stefan Metzmacher
2022-08-17 12:42 ` Pavel Begunkov
2022-08-18 18:13 ` Stefan Metzmacher
2022-08-19 11:42 ` Pavel Begunkov
2022-08-19 12:36 ` Stefan Metzmacher
2022-08-22 11:49 ` Pavel Begunkov
2022-08-16 8:37 ` Dylan Yudaken
2022-08-17 10:48 ` Pavel Begunkov
2022-08-17 12:04 ` Dylan Yudaken
2022-08-17 12:44 ` Pavel Begunkov [this message]
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