From: Linus Torvalds <[email protected]>
To: Jens Axboe <[email protected]>
Cc: io-uring <[email protected]>,
linux-fsdevel <[email protected]>,
Al Viro <[email protected]>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/3] io_uring: use iov_iter state save/restore helpers
Date: Tue, 14 Sep 2021 11:45:02 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <CAHk-=wh6mGm0b7AnKNRzDO07nrdpCrvHtUQ=afTH6pZ2JiBpeQ@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <[email protected]>
On Tue, Sep 14, 2021 at 7:18 AM Jens Axboe <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>
> + iov_iter_restore(iter, state);
> +
...
> rw->bytes_done += ret;
> + iov_iter_advance(iter, ret);
> + if (!iov_iter_count(iter))
> + break;
> + iov_iter_save_state(iter, state);
Ok, so now you keep iovb_iter and the state always in sync by just
always resetting the iter back and then walking it forward explicitly
- and re-saving the state.
That seems safe, if potentially unnecessarily expensive.
I guess re-walking lots of iovec entries is actually very unlikely in
practice, so maybe this "stupid brute-force" model is the right one.
I do find the odd "use __state vs rw->state" to be very confusing,
though. Particularly in io_read(), where you do this:
+ iov_iter_restore(iter, state);
+
ret2 = io_setup_async_rw(req, iovec, inline_vecs, iter, true);
if (ret2)
return ret2;
iovec = NULL;
rw = req->async_data;
- /* now use our persistent iterator, if we aren't already */
- iter = &rw->iter;
+ /* now use our persistent iterator and state, if we aren't already */
+ if (iter != &rw->iter) {
+ iter = &rw->iter;
+ state = &rw->iter_state;
+ }
do {
- io_size -= ret;
rw->bytes_done += ret;
+ iov_iter_advance(iter, ret);
+ if (!iov_iter_count(iter))
+ break;
+ iov_iter_save_state(iter, state);
Note how it first does that iov_iter_restore() on iter/state, buit
then it *replaces&* the iter/state pointers, and then it does
iov_iter_advance() on the replacement ones.
I don't see how that could be right. You're doing iov_iter_advance()
on something else than the one you restored to the original values.
And if it is right, it's sure confusing as hell.
Linus
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2021-09-14 18:45 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 9+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2021-09-14 14:17 [PATCHSET v2 0/3] Add ability to save/restore iov_iter state Jens Axboe
2021-09-14 14:17 ` [PATCH 1/3] iov_iter: add helper to save " Jens Axboe
2021-09-14 14:17 ` [PATCH 2/3] io_uring: use iov_iter state save/restore helpers Jens Axboe
2021-09-14 18:45 ` Linus Torvalds [this message]
2021-09-14 19:37 ` Jens Axboe
2021-09-14 23:02 ` Jens Axboe
2021-09-14 14:17 ` [PATCH 3/3] Revert "iov_iter: track truncated size" Jens Axboe
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2021-09-15 16:29 [PATCHSET v3 0/3] Add ability to save/restore iov_iter state Jens Axboe
2021-09-15 16:29 ` [PATCH 2/3] io_uring: use iov_iter state save/restore helpers Jens Axboe
2021-09-10 18:25 [PATCHSET 0/3] Add ability to save/restore iov_iter state Jens Axboe
2021-09-10 18:25 ` [PATCH 2/3] io_uring: use iov_iter state save/restore helpers 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 \
--in-reply-to='CAHk-=wh6mGm0b7AnKNRzDO07nrdpCrvHtUQ=afTH6pZ2JiBpeQ@mail.gmail.com' \
[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