From: Caleb Sander Mateos <csander@purestorage.com>
To: Jens Axboe <axboe@kernel.dk>
Cc: io-uring@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 3/5] io_uring: clear IORING_SETUP_SINGLE_ISSUER for IORING_SETUP_SQPOLL
Date: Mon, 8 Sep 2025 11:11:58 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <CADUfDZovKhJvF+zaVukM75KLSUsCwUDRoMybMKLpHioPpcfJCw@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <07806298-f9d3-4ca6-8ce5-4088c9f0ea2c@kernel.dk>
On Mon, Sep 8, 2025 at 7:13 AM Jens Axboe <axboe@kernel.dk> wrote:
>
> On 9/4/25 11:09 AM, Caleb Sander Mateos wrote:
> > IORING_SETUP_SINGLE_ISSUER doesn't currently enable any optimizations,
> > but it will soon be used to avoid taking io_ring_ctx's uring_lock when
> > submitting from the single issuer task. If the IORING_SETUP_SQPOLL flag
> > is set, the SQ thread is the sole task issuing SQEs. However, other
> > tasks may make io_uring_register() syscalls, which must be synchronized
> > with SQE submission. So it wouldn't be safe to skip the uring_lock
> > around the SQ thread's submission even if IORING_SETUP_SINGLE_ISSUER is
> > set. Therefore, clear IORING_SETUP_SINGLE_ISSUER from the io_ring_ctx
> > flags if IORING_SETUP_SQPOLL is set.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Caleb Sander Mateos <csander@purestorage.com>
> > ---
> > io_uring/io_uring.c | 9 +++++++++
> > 1 file changed, 9 insertions(+)
> >
> > diff --git a/io_uring/io_uring.c b/io_uring/io_uring.c
> > index 42f6bfbb99d3..c7af9dc3d95a 100644
> > --- a/io_uring/io_uring.c
> > +++ b/io_uring/io_uring.c
> > @@ -3724,10 +3724,19 @@ static int io_uring_sanitise_params(struct io_uring_params *p)
> > */
> > if ((flags & (IORING_SETUP_CQE32|IORING_SETUP_CQE_MIXED)) ==
> > (IORING_SETUP_CQE32|IORING_SETUP_CQE_MIXED))
> > return -EINVAL;
> >
> > + /*
> > + * If IORING_SETUP_SQPOLL is set, only the SQ thread issues SQEs,
> > + * but other threads may call io_uring_register() concurrently.
> > + * We still need uring_lock to synchronize these io_ring_ctx accesses,
> > + * so disable the single issuer optimizations.
> > + */
> > + if (flags & IORING_SETUP_SQPOLL)
> > + p->flags &= ~IORING_SETUP_SINGLE_ISSUER;
> > +
>
> As mentioned I think this is fine. Just for posterity, one solution
> here would be to require that the task doing eg io_uring_register() on a
> setup with SINGLE_ISSUER|SQPOLL would be required to park and unpark the
> SQ thread before doing what it needs to do. That should get us most/all
> of the way there to enabling it with SQPOLL as well.
Right, though that may make io_uring_register() significantly slower
and disruptive to the I/O path. Another option would be to proxy all
registrations to the SQ thread via task_work. I think leaving the
current behavior as-is makes the most sense to avoid any regressions.
If someone is interested in optimizing the IORING_SETUP_SQPOLL &&
IORING_SETUP_SINGLE_ISSUER use case, they're more than welcome to!
I appreciate your feedback on the series. Do you have any other thoughts on it?
Best,
Caleb
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2025-09-08 18:12 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 18+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2025-09-04 17:08 [PATCH v2 0/5] io_uring: avoid uring_lock for IORING_SETUP_SINGLE_ISSUER Caleb Sander Mateos
2025-09-04 17:08 ` [PATCH v2 1/5] io_uring: don't include filetable.h in io_uring.h Caleb Sander Mateos
2025-09-04 17:08 ` [PATCH v2 2/5] io_uring/rsrc: respect submitter_task in io_register_clone_buffers() Caleb Sander Mateos
2025-09-09 13:35 ` Jens Axboe
2025-09-04 17:09 ` [PATCH v2 3/5] io_uring: clear IORING_SETUP_SINGLE_ISSUER for IORING_SETUP_SQPOLL Caleb Sander Mateos
2025-09-08 14:13 ` Jens Axboe
2025-09-08 18:11 ` Caleb Sander Mateos [this message]
2025-09-08 19:19 ` Jens Axboe
2025-09-04 17:09 ` [PATCH v2 4/5] io_uring: factor out uring_lock helpers Caleb Sander Mateos
2025-09-04 17:09 ` [PATCH v2 5/5] io_uring: avoid uring_lock for IORING_SETUP_SINGLE_ISSUER Caleb Sander Mateos
2025-09-08 19:20 ` Jens Axboe
2025-09-09 13:35 ` [PATCH v2 0/5] " Jens Axboe
2025-09-10 11:57 ` Pavel Begunkov
2025-09-10 15:36 ` Jens Axboe
2025-09-11 10:36 ` Pavel Begunkov
2025-09-30 23:37 ` Caleb Sander Mateos
2025-11-03 20:47 ` Caleb Sander Mateos
2025-09-11 16:14 ` Caleb Sander Mateos
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=CADUfDZovKhJvF+zaVukM75KLSUsCwUDRoMybMKLpHioPpcfJCw@mail.gmail.com \
--to=csander@purestorage.com \
--cc=axboe@kernel.dk \
--cc=io-uring@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
/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