From: Jens Axboe <[email protected]>
To: Pavel Begunkov <[email protected]>,
[email protected], [email protected]
Subject: Re: [PATCH 9/9] io_uring: pass submission ref to async
Date: Mon, 2 Mar 2020 08:12:44 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <[email protected]> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <[email protected]>
On 3/2/20 8:08 AM, Pavel Begunkov wrote:
> On 3/2/2020 12:39 AM, Pavel Begunkov wrote:
>> On 01/03/2020 19:18, Pavel Begunkov wrote:
>>> Currenlty, every async work handler accepts a submission reference,
>>> which it should put. Also there is a reference grabbed in io_get_work()
>>> and dropped in io_put_work(). This patch merge them together.
>>>
>>> - So, ownership of the submission reference passed to io-wq, and it'll
>>> be put in io_put_work().
>>> - io_get_put() doesn't take a ref now and so deleted.
>>> - async handlers don't put the submission ref anymore.
>>> - make cancellation bits of io-wq to call {get,put}_work() handlers
>>
>> Hmm, it makes them more like {init,fini}_work() and unbalanced/unpaired. May be
>> no a desirable thing.
>
> Any objections against replacing {get,put}_work() with
> io_finilise_work()? It will be called once and only once, and a work
> must not go away until it happened. It will be enough for now, but not
> sure whether you have some plans for this get/put pinning.
I have no further plans there, the get/put work only exist to ensure that
the work item stays valid in case of cancelation lookups.
--
Jens Axboe
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2020-03-02 15:12 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 21+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2020-03-01 16:18 [PATCH RFC 0/9] nxt propagation + locking optimisation Pavel Begunkov
2020-03-01 16:18 ` [PATCH 1/9] io_uring: clean up io_close Pavel Begunkov
2020-03-01 16:18 ` [PATCH 2/9] io-wq: fix IO_WQ_WORK_NO_CANCEL cancellation Pavel Begunkov
2020-03-02 14:24 ` Jens Axboe
2020-03-01 16:18 ` [PATCH 3/9] io_uring: make submission ref putting consistent Pavel Begunkov
2020-03-01 16:18 ` [PATCH 4/9] io_uring: remove @nxt from handlers Pavel Begunkov
2020-03-01 16:18 ` [PATCH 5/9] io_uring: get next req on subm ref drop Pavel Begunkov
2020-03-01 21:31 ` Pavel Begunkov
2020-03-01 16:18 ` [PATCH 6/9] io-wq: shuffle io_worker_handle_work() code Pavel Begunkov
2020-03-01 16:18 ` [PATCH 7/9] io-wq: io_worker_handle_work() optimise locking Pavel Begunkov
2020-03-01 16:18 ` [PATCH 8/9] io-wq: optimise double lock for io_get_next_work() Pavel Begunkov
2020-03-01 16:18 ` [PATCH 9/9] io_uring: pass submission ref to async Pavel Begunkov
2020-03-01 21:39 ` Pavel Begunkov
2020-03-02 15:08 ` Pavel Begunkov
2020-03-02 15:12 ` Jens Axboe [this message]
2020-03-02 15:26 ` Pavel Begunkov
2020-03-01 16:23 ` [PATCH RFC 0/9] nxt propagation + locking optimisation Pavel Begunkov
2020-03-01 16:41 ` Pavel Begunkov
2020-03-01 19:14 ` Jens Axboe
2020-03-01 20:33 ` Pavel Begunkov
2020-03-02 14:39 ` Jens Axboe
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] \
/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