From: Ming Lei <[email protected]>
To: Pavel Begunkov <[email protected]>
Cc: Breno Leitao <[email protected]>,
[email protected], [email protected], [email protected],
[email protected], [email protected],
[email protected], [email protected], [email protected],
[email protected], [email protected],
[email protected], [email protected],
[email protected], [email protected],
[email protected], [email protected]
Subject: Re: [PATCH RFC] io_uring: Pass whole sqe to commands
Date: Fri, 14 Apr 2023 21:59:57 +0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <[email protected]> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <[email protected]>
On Fri, Apr 14, 2023 at 02:12:10PM +0100, Pavel Begunkov wrote:
> On 4/14/23 03:12, Ming Lei wrote:
> > On Thu, Apr 13, 2023 at 09:47:56AM -0700, Breno Leitao wrote:
> > > Hello Ming,
> > >
> > > On Thu, Apr 13, 2023 at 10:56:49AM +0800, Ming Lei wrote:
> > > > On Thu, Apr 06, 2023 at 09:57:05AM -0700, Breno Leitao wrote:
> > > > > Currently uring CMD operation relies on having large SQEs, but future
> > > > > operations might want to use normal SQE.
> > > > >
> > > > > The io_uring_cmd currently only saves the payload (cmd) part of the SQE,
> > > > > but, for commands that use normal SQE size, it might be necessary to
> > > > > access the initial SQE fields outside of the payload/cmd block. So,
> > > > > saves the whole SQE other than just the pdu.
> > > > >
> > > > > This changes slighlty how the io_uring_cmd works, since the cmd
> > > > > structures and callbacks are not opaque to io_uring anymore. I.e, the
> > > > > callbacks can look at the SQE entries, not only, in the cmd structure.
> > > > >
> > > > > The main advantage is that we don't need to create custom structures for
> > > > > simple commands.
> > > > >
> > > > > Suggested-by: Pavel Begunkov <[email protected]>
> > > > > Signed-off-by: Breno Leitao <[email protected]>
> > > > > ---
> > > >
> > > > ...
> > > >
> > > > > diff --git a/io_uring/uring_cmd.c b/io_uring/uring_cmd.c
> > > > > index 2e4c483075d3..9648134ccae1 100644
> > > > > --- a/io_uring/uring_cmd.c
> > > > > +++ b/io_uring/uring_cmd.c
> > > > > @@ -63,14 +63,15 @@ EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(io_uring_cmd_done);
> > > > > int io_uring_cmd_prep_async(struct io_kiocb *req)
> > > > > {
> > > > > struct io_uring_cmd *ioucmd = io_kiocb_to_cmd(req, struct io_uring_cmd);
> > > > > - size_t cmd_size;
> > > > > + size_t size = sizeof(struct io_uring_sqe);
> > > > > BUILD_BUG_ON(uring_cmd_pdu_size(0) != 16);
> > > > > BUILD_BUG_ON(uring_cmd_pdu_size(1) != 80);
> > > > > - cmd_size = uring_cmd_pdu_size(req->ctx->flags & IORING_SETUP_SQE128);
> > > > > + if (req->ctx->flags & IORING_SETUP_SQE128)
> > > > > + size <<= 1;
> > > > > - memcpy(req->async_data, ioucmd->cmd, cmd_size);
> > > > > + memcpy(req->async_data, ioucmd->sqe, size);
> > > >
> > > > The copy will make some fields of sqe become READ TWICE, and driver may see
> > > > different sqe field value compared with the one observed in io_init_req().
> > >
> > > This copy only happens if the operation goes to the async path
> > > (calling io_uring_cmd_prep_async()). This only happens if
> > > f_op->uring_cmd() returns -EAGAIN.
> > >
> > > ret = file->f_op->uring_cmd(ioucmd, issue_flags);
> > > if (ret == -EAGAIN) {
> > > if (!req_has_async_data(req)) {
> > > if (io_alloc_async_data(req))
> > > return -ENOMEM;
> > > io_uring_cmd_prep_async(req);
> > > }
> > > return -EAGAIN;
> > > }
> > >
> > > Are you saying that after this copy, the operation is still reading from
> > > sqe instead of req->async_data?
> >
> > I meant that the 2nd read is on the sqe copy(req->aync_data), but same
> > fields can become different between the two READs(first is done on original
> > SQE during io_init_req(), and second is done on sqe copy in driver).
> >
> > Will this kind of inconsistency cause trouble for driver? Cause READ
> > TWICE becomes possible with this patch.
>
> Right it might happen, and I was keeping that in mind, but it's not
> specific to this patch. It won't reload core io_uring bits, and all
It depends if driver reloads core bits or not, anyway the patch exports
all fields and opens the window.
> fields cmds use already have this problem.
driver is supposed to load cmds field just once too, right?
>
> Unless there is a better option, the direction we'll be moving in is
> adding a preparation step that should read and stash parts of SQE
> it cares about, which should also make full SQE copy not
> needed / optional.
Sounds good.
Thanks,
Ming
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2023-04-14 14:01 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 48+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2023-04-06 14:43 [PATCH 0/5] add initial io_uring_cmd support for sockets Breno Leitao
2023-04-06 14:43 ` [RFC PATCH 1/4] net: wire up support for file_operations->uring_cmd() Breno Leitao
2023-04-06 14:43 ` [RFC PATCH 2/4] net: add uring_cmd callback to UDP Breno Leitao
2023-04-11 12:54 ` Pavel Begunkov
2023-04-06 14:43 ` [RFC PATCH 3/4] net: add uring_cmd callback to TCP Breno Leitao
2023-04-06 14:43 ` [RFC PATCH 4/4] net: add uring_cmd callback to raw "protocol" Breno Leitao
2023-04-06 15:34 ` [PATCH 0/5] add initial io_uring_cmd support for sockets Willem de Bruijn
2023-04-06 15:59 ` Breno Leitao
2023-04-06 18:16 ` Willem de Bruijn
2023-04-07 2:46 ` David Ahern
2023-04-11 12:00 ` Breno Leitao
2023-04-11 14:36 ` David Ahern
2023-04-11 14:41 ` Jens Axboe
2023-04-11 14:51 ` Willem de Bruijn
2023-04-11 14:54 ` Jens Axboe
2023-04-11 15:00 ` Willem de Bruijn
2023-04-11 15:06 ` Jens Axboe
2023-04-11 15:24 ` Willem de Bruijn
2023-04-11 15:28 ` Jens Axboe
2023-04-12 13:53 ` Breno Leitao
2023-04-12 14:28 ` Willem de Bruijn
2023-04-13 0:02 ` Breno Leitao
2023-04-13 14:24 ` Willem de Bruijn
2023-04-13 14:45 ` Jakub Kicinski
2023-04-13 14:57 ` David Laight
2023-04-18 13:23 ` Breno Leitao
2023-04-18 19:41 ` Willem de Bruijn
2023-04-20 14:43 ` Breno Leitao
2023-04-20 16:48 ` Willem de Bruijn
2023-04-11 15:10 ` David Ahern
2023-04-11 15:17 ` Jens Axboe
2023-04-11 15:27 ` David Ahern
2023-04-11 15:29 ` Jens Axboe
2023-04-12 7:39 ` David Laight
2023-04-06 16:41 ` Keith Busch
2023-04-06 16:49 ` Jens Axboe
2023-04-06 16:58 ` Breno Leitao
2023-04-06 16:57 ` [PATCH RFC] io_uring: Pass whole sqe to commands Breno Leitao
2023-04-07 18:51 ` Keith Busch
2023-04-11 12:22 ` Breno Leitao
2023-04-11 12:39 ` Pavel Begunkov
2023-04-13 2:56 ` Ming Lei
2023-04-13 16:47 ` Breno Leitao
2023-04-14 2:12 ` Ming Lei
2023-04-14 13:12 ` Pavel Begunkov
2023-04-14 13:59 ` Ming Lei [this message]
2023-04-14 14:56 ` Pavel Begunkov
2023-04-16 9:51 ` Ming Lei
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 \
[email protected] \
[email protected] \
[email protected] \
[email protected] \
[email protected] \
[email protected] \
[email protected] \
[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