From: Ming Lei <[email protected]>
To: Gabriel Krisman Bertazi <[email protected]>
Cc: Jens Axboe <[email protected]>,
[email protected], [email protected],
[email protected],
ZiyangZhang <[email protected]>,
Xiaoguang Wang <[email protected]>,
Oleg Nesterov <[email protected]>,
[email protected]
Subject: Re: [PATCH V4 2/2] ublk_drv: add UBLK_IO_REFETCH_REQ for supporting to build as module
Date: Tue, 12 Jul 2022 18:08:18 +0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <Ys1IEiIs2Xlp5iAk@T590> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <YszdfgTbmHWveFjW@T590>
On Tue, Jul 12, 2022 at 10:33:34AM +0800, Ming Lei wrote:
> Hi Gabriel,
>
> On Mon, Jul 11, 2022 at 04:06:04PM -0400, Gabriel Krisman Bertazi wrote:
> > Ming Lei <[email protected]> writes:
> >
> > > Add UBLK_IO_REFETCH_REQ command to fetch the incoming io request in
> > > ubq daemon context, so we can avoid to call task_work_add(), then
> > > it is fine to build ublk driver as module.
> > >
> > > In this way, iops is affected a bit, but just by ~5% on ublk/null,
> > > given io_uring provides pretty good batching issuing & completing.
> > >
> > > One thing to be careful is race between ->queue_rq() and handling
> > > abort, which is avoided by quiescing queue when aborting queue.
> > > Except for that, handling abort becomes much easier with
> > > UBLK_IO_REFETCH_REQ since aborting handler is strictly exclusive with
> > > anything done in ubq daemon kernel context.
> >
> > Hi Ming,
> >
> > FWIW, I'm not very fond this change. It adds complexity to the kernel
> > driver and to the userspace server implementation, who now have to deal
>
> IMO, this way just adds dozens line of code, no much complexity. The only
> complexity in ublk driver should be in aborting code, which is actually
> originated from concurrent aborting work and running task work which may be
> run after task is exiting. But any storage driver's aborting/error
> handling code is complicated.
>
> Using REFETCH_REQ actually becomes much easier for handling abort which is
> run exclusively with any code running in ubq daemon context, but with
> performance cost.
>
> > with different interface semantics just because the driver was built-in
> > or built as a module. I don't think the tristate support warrants such
> > complexity. I was hoping we might get away with exporting that symbol
> > or adding a built-in ubd-specific wrapper that can be exported and
> > invokes task_work_add.
>
> If task_work_add can be exported, that would be very great.
Another choice is to use io_uring_cmd_complete_in_task which is actually
exported, now we can build ublk_drv as module by using io_uring_cmd_complete_in_task
without needing one new command.
Thanks,
Ming
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2022-07-12 10:08 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 13+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2022-07-11 2:20 [PATCH V4 0/2] ublk: add io_uring based userspace block driver Ming Lei
2022-07-11 2:20 ` [PATCH V4 1/2] " Ming Lei
2022-07-11 2:20 ` [PATCH V4 2/2] ublk_drv: add UBLK_IO_REFETCH_REQ for supporting to build as module Ming Lei
2022-07-11 20:06 ` Gabriel Krisman Bertazi
2022-07-12 2:26 ` Ziyang Zhang
2022-07-12 2:46 ` Ming Lei
2022-07-12 2:33 ` Ming Lei
2022-07-12 10:08 ` Ming Lei [this message]
2022-07-11 11:58 ` [PATCH V4 0/2] ublk: add io_uring based userspace block driver Xiaoguang Wang
[not found] ` <[email protected]>
2022-07-11 14:03 ` Ming Lei
2022-07-12 8:44 ` Xiaoguang Wang
2022-07-12 11:30 ` Ming Lei
2022-07-12 15:16 ` Xiaoguang Wang
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=Ys1IEiIs2Xlp5iAk@T590 \
[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