From: Miklos Szeredi <[email protected]>
To: Bernd Schubert <[email protected]>
Cc: Jens Axboe <[email protected]>,
Pavel Begunkov <[email protected]>,
[email protected], [email protected],
Joanne Koong <[email protected]>,
Josef Bacik <[email protected]>,
Amir Goldstein <[email protected]>,
Ming Lei <[email protected]>, David Wei <[email protected]>,
[email protected]
Subject: Re: [PATCH RFC v6 06/16] fuse: {uring} Handle SQEs - register commands
Date: Sat, 23 Nov 2024 14:09:25 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <CAJfpegt=CxhYSyxWVBAWnf2S926Vj+1yEF_GPkOJYRMN_XbkSQ@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <[email protected]>
On Sat, 23 Nov 2024 at 13:42, Bernd Schubert <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>
>
> On 11/23/24 10:52, Miklos Szeredi wrote:
> > On Fri, 22 Nov 2024 at 00:44, Bernd Schubert <[email protected]> wrote:
> >
> >> +static struct fuse_ring *fuse_uring_create(struct fuse_conn *fc)
> >> +{
> >> + struct fuse_ring *ring = NULL;
> >> + size_t nr_queues = num_possible_cpus();
> >> + struct fuse_ring *res = NULL;
> >> +
> >> + ring = kzalloc(sizeof(*fc->ring) +
> >> + nr_queues * sizeof(struct fuse_ring_queue),
> >
> > Left over from a previous version?
>
> Why? This struct holds all the queues? We could also put into fc, but
> it would take additional memory, even if uring is not used.
But fuse_ring_queue is allocated on demand in
fuse_uring_create_queue(). Where is this space actually gets used?
> there you really need a ring state, because access is outside of lists.
> Unless you want to iterate over the lists, if the the entry is still
> in there. Please see the discussion with Joanne in RFC v5.
> I have also added in v6 15/16 comments about non-list access.
Okay, let that be then.
> Even though libfuse sends the SQEs before
> setting up /dev/fuse threads, handling the SQEs takes longer.
> So what happens is that while IORING_OP_URING_CMD/FUSE_URING_REQ_FETCH
> are coming in, FUSE_INIT reply gets through. In userspace we do not
> know at all, when these SQEs are registered, because we don't get
> a reply. Even worse, we don't even know if io-uring works at all and
> cannot adjust number of /dev/fuse handling threads. Here setup with
> ioctls had a clear advantage - there was a clear reply.
Server could negotiate fuse uring availability in INIT, which is how
all other feature negotiations work.
> The other issue is, that we will probably first need handle FUSE_INIT
> in userspace before sending SQEs at all, in order to know the payload
> buffer size.
Yeah.
Thanks,
Miklos
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2024-11-23 13:09 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 21+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2024-11-21 23:43 [PATCH RFC v6 00/16] fuse: fuse-over-io-uring Bernd Schubert
2024-11-21 23:43 ` [PATCH RFC v6 01/16] fuse: rename to fuse_dev_end_requests and make non-static Bernd Schubert
2024-11-21 23:43 ` [PATCH RFC v6 02/16] fuse: Move fuse_get_dev to header file Bernd Schubert
2024-11-21 23:43 ` [PATCH RFC v6 03/16] fuse: Move request bits Bernd Schubert
2024-11-21 23:43 ` [PATCH RFC v6 04/16] fuse: Add fuse-io-uring design documentation Bernd Schubert
2024-11-21 23:43 ` [PATCH RFC v6 05/16] fuse: make args->in_args[0] to be always the header Bernd Schubert
2024-11-23 9:01 ` Miklos Szeredi
2024-11-21 23:43 ` [PATCH RFC v6 06/16] fuse: {uring} Handle SQEs - register commands Bernd Schubert
2024-11-23 9:52 ` Miklos Szeredi
2024-11-23 12:42 ` Bernd Schubert
2024-11-23 13:09 ` Miklos Szeredi [this message]
2024-11-21 23:43 ` [PATCH RFC v6 07/16] fuse: Make fuse_copy non static Bernd Schubert
2024-11-21 23:43 ` [PATCH RFC v6 08/16] fuse: Add fuse-io-uring handling into fuse_copy Bernd Schubert
2024-11-21 23:43 ` [PATCH RFC v6 09/16] fuse: {uring} Add uring sqe commit and fetch support Bernd Schubert
2024-11-21 23:43 ` [PATCH RFC v6 10/16] fuse: {uring} Handle teardown of ring entries Bernd Schubert
2024-11-21 23:43 ` [PATCH RFC v6 11/16] fuse: {uring} Allow to queue fg requests through io-uring Bernd Schubert
2024-11-21 23:43 ` [PATCH RFC v6 12/16] fuse: {uring} Allow to queue to the ring Bernd Schubert
2024-11-21 23:43 ` [PATCH RFC v6 13/16] io_uring/cmd: let cmds to know about dying task Bernd Schubert
2024-11-21 23:43 ` [PATCH RFC v6 14/16] fuse: {uring} Handle IO_URING_F_TASK_DEAD Bernd Schubert
2024-11-21 23:43 ` [PATCH RFC v6 15/16] fuse: {io-uring} Prevent mount point hang on fuse-server termination Bernd Schubert
2024-11-21 23:43 ` [PATCH RFC v6 16/16] fuse: enable fuse-over-io-uring Bernd Schubert
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='CAJfpegt=CxhYSyxWVBAWnf2S926Vj+1yEF_GPkOJYRMN_XbkSQ@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