From: Willem de Bruijn <[email protected]>
To: Pavel Begunkov <[email protected]>
Cc: Willem de Bruijn <[email protected]>,
[email protected], [email protected],
[email protected], Jakub Kicinski <[email protected]>,
Jonathan Lemon <[email protected]>,
"David S . Miller" <[email protected]>,
Eric Dumazet <[email protected]>,
Hideaki YOSHIFUJI <[email protected]>,
David Ahern <[email protected]>, Jens Axboe <[email protected]>
Subject: Re: [RFC 00/12] io_uring zerocopy send
Date: Fri, 3 Dec 2021 11:30:21 -0500 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <CA+FuTSeNvG9XCv0a8W0h1vZL+CrVQJnv-Ym57LfS3HnsDjLKSA@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <[email protected]>
On Fri, Dec 3, 2021 at 11:19 AM Pavel Begunkov <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> On 12/2/21 21:25, Willem de Bruijn wrote:
> >>> What if the ubuf pool can be found from the sk, and the index in that
> >>> pool is passed as a cmsg?
> >>
> >> It looks to me that ubufs are by nature is something that is not
> >> tightly bound to a socket (at least for io_uring API in the patchset),
> >> it'll be pretty ugly:
> >>
> >> 1) io_uring'd need to care to register the pool in the socket. Having
> >> multiple rings using the same socket would be horrible. It may be that
> >> it doesn't make much sense to send in parallel from multiple rings, but
> >> a per thread io_uring is a popular solution, and then someone would
> >> want to pass a socket from one thread to another and we'd need to support
> >> it.
> >>
> >> 2) And io_uring would also need to unregister it, so the pool would
> >> store a list of sockets where it's used, and so referencing sockets
> >> and then we need to bind it somehow to io_uring fixed files or
> >> register all that for tracking referencing circular dependencies.
> >>
> >> 3) IIRC, we can't add a cmsg entry from the kernel, right? May be wrong,
> >> but if so I don't like exposing basically io_uring's referencing through
> >> cmsg. And it sounds io_uring would need to parse cmsg then.
> >>
> >>
> >> A lot of nuances :) I'd really prefer to pass it on per-request basis,
> >
> > Ok
> >
> >> it's much cleaner, but still haven't got what's up with msghdr
> >> initialisation...
> >
> > And passing the struct through multiple layers of functions.
>
> If you refer to ip_make_skb(ubuf) -> __ip_append_data(ubuf), I agree
> it's a bit messier, will see what can be done. If you're about
> msghdr::msg_ubuf, for me it's more like passing a callback,
> which sounds like a normal thing to do.
Thanks, I do mean the first.
Also, small nit now that it comes up again msghdr::msg_ubuf is not
plain C. I would avoid that pseudo C++ notation (in the subject line
of 3/12)
>
> >> Maybe, it's better to add a flags field, which would include
> >> "msg_control_is_user : 1" and whether msghdr includes msg_iocb, msg_ubuf,
> >> and everything else that may be optional. Does it sound sane?
> >
> > If sendmsg takes the argument, it will just have to be initialized, I think.
> >
> > Other functions are not aware of its existence so it can remain
> > uninitialized there.
>
> Got it, need to double check, but looks something like 1/12 should
> be as you outlined.
>
> And if there will be multiple optional fields that have to be
> initialised, we would be able to hide all the zeroing under a
> single bitmask. E.g. instead of
>
> msg->field1 = NULL;
> ...
> msg->fieldN = NULL;
>
> It may look like
>
> msg->mask = 0; // HAS_FIELD1 | HAS_FIELDN;
Makes sense to me. This patch series only adds one field, so you can
leave the optimization for a possible future separate patch series?
prev parent reply other threads:[~2021-12-03 16:31 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 40+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2021-11-30 15:18 [RFC 00/12] io_uring zerocopy send Pavel Begunkov
2021-11-30 15:18 ` [RFC 01/12] skbuff: add SKBFL_DONT_ORPHAN flag Pavel Begunkov
2021-11-30 15:18 ` [RFC 02/12] skbuff: pass a struct ubuf_info in msghdr Pavel Begunkov
2021-11-30 15:18 ` [RFC 03/12] net/udp: add support msgdr::msg_ubuf Pavel Begunkov
2021-11-30 15:18 ` [RFC 04/12] net: add zerocopy_sg_from_iter for bvec Pavel Begunkov
2021-11-30 15:18 ` [RFC 05/12] net: optimise page get/free for bvec zc Pavel Begunkov
2021-12-01 19:20 ` Jonathan Lemon
2021-12-01 20:17 ` Pavel Begunkov
2021-11-30 15:18 ` [RFC 06/12] io_uring: add send notifiers registration Pavel Begunkov
2021-11-30 15:18 ` [RFC 07/12] io_uring: infrastructure for send zc notifications Pavel Begunkov
2021-11-30 15:18 ` [RFC 08/12] io_uring: wire send zc request type Pavel Begunkov
2021-11-30 15:18 ` [RFC 09/12] io_uring: add an option to flush zc notifications Pavel Begunkov
2021-11-30 15:18 ` [RFC 10/12] io_uring: opcode independent fixed buf import Pavel Begunkov
2021-11-30 15:18 ` [RFC 11/12] io_uring: sendzc with fixed buffers Pavel Begunkov
2021-11-30 15:19 ` [RFC 12/12] io_uring: cache struct ubuf_info Pavel Begunkov
2021-12-01 3:10 ` [RFC 00/12] io_uring zerocopy send David Ahern
2021-12-01 15:32 ` Pavel Begunkov
2021-12-01 17:57 ` David Ahern
[not found] ` <[email protected]>
2021-12-01 19:20 ` David Ahern
2021-12-01 20:15 ` Pavel Begunkov
2021-12-01 21:51 ` Martin KaFai Lau
2021-12-01 22:35 ` David Ahern
2021-12-01 23:07 ` Martin KaFai Lau
2021-12-01 23:18 ` Pavel Begunkov
2021-12-02 15:48 ` Pavel Begunkov
2021-12-02 17:40 ` Martin KaFai Lau
2021-12-01 20:42 ` Pavel Begunkov
2021-12-01 14:31 ` Pavel Begunkov
2021-12-01 17:49 ` David Ahern
2021-12-01 19:59 ` Pavel Begunkov
2021-12-01 18:10 ` Willem de Bruijn
2021-12-01 19:59 ` Pavel Begunkov
2021-12-01 20:29 ` Pavel Begunkov
2021-12-02 0:36 ` Willem de Bruijn
2021-12-02 16:25 ` Pavel Begunkov
2021-12-02 0:32 ` Willem de Bruijn
2021-12-02 16:45 ` Pavel Begunkov
2021-12-02 21:25 ` Willem de Bruijn
2021-12-03 16:19 ` Pavel Begunkov
2021-12-03 16:30 ` Willem de Bruijn [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 \
--in-reply-to=CA+FuTSeNvG9XCv0a8W0h1vZL+CrVQJnv-Ym57LfS3HnsDjLKSA@mail.gmail.com \
[email protected] \
[email protected] \
[email protected] \
[email protected] \
[email protected] \
[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