From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from us-smtp-delivery-124.mimecast.com (us-smtp-delivery-124.mimecast.com [170.10.129.124]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 39D15184F for ; Sat, 3 May 2025 01:00:28 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=170.10.129.124 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1746234031; cv=none; b=YA69HXm/MGarzwRMSTp26cNsUQNHY4Tsbr5nZMJuy0FQ0dBsD+BW1i1FYYZ7McUUcByWF7q30AbC8XEKa6Bl+mRzvCO+SR4eXhBFv67wnJFohrsZgFwRvQRSnfjHkmySX4l+ANQtSnjBfT+1Esh8aWRjZXsFoky6R76mZWhn2i0= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1746234031; c=relaxed/simple; bh=A11yRfoSAXAPBviL2B4iJChHaU6OZYUImw3yMGDqKgc=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:Message-ID:References:MIME-Version: Content-Type:Content-Disposition:In-Reply-To; b=qM2b51lwHeWk5q65SmH7/EXLTYqfefV2UFVzQiiVbfoo2Ad8U3A7WdGl0vEIbAWJ6nxBQTADtB619R1P4GLz5+yqrlmKCmUK7MOj750Xm9EhY7n5rflVGjRbweCSG64u08hOxL3ePc2e/FWsdS6EKmHABhWdRA1uEOkUj8LZT5E= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=quarantine dis=none) header.from=redhat.com; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=redhat.com; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=redhat.com header.i=@redhat.com header.b=Gmh1bfaD; arc=none smtp.client-ip=170.10.129.124 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=quarantine dis=none) header.from=redhat.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=redhat.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=redhat.com header.i=@redhat.com header.b="Gmh1bfaD" DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=redhat.com; s=mimecast20190719; t=1746234028; h=from:from:reply-to:subject:subject:date:date:message-id:message-id: to:to:cc:cc:mime-version:mime-version:content-type:content-type: content-transfer-encoding:content-transfer-encoding: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=CovQiVq3j4sWSzKiLPnIcwJ7jx1eTkt2Yk/QEktGzc4=; b=Gmh1bfaDIJK/IdUYvT5WBUkmKy7PP2rNYqnsmsr+J8IHdIxEsVq2+bxfnv+wlrDdUMw2XS meZ+ma+tqvKINojIMtotizZ5g2aPOXU1aE8xq/u0GcZKeb5oNWBxtyWOVSc8KKLwbDA6lN +hSkGUzeZIA9oPUOUaOtFJzxOI61+yQ= Received: from mx-prod-mc-01.mail-002.prod.us-west-2.aws.redhat.com (ec2-54-186-198-63.us-west-2.compute.amazonaws.com [54.186.198.63]) by relay.mimecast.com with ESMTP with STARTTLS (version=TLSv1.3, cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384) id us-mta-441-ZAq4MCvcMpiiuxLj0iC3YA-1; Fri, 02 May 2025 21:00:26 -0400 X-MC-Unique: ZAq4MCvcMpiiuxLj0iC3YA-1 X-Mimecast-MFC-AGG-ID: ZAq4MCvcMpiiuxLj0iC3YA_1746234024 Received: from mx-prod-int-02.mail-002.prod.us-west-2.aws.redhat.com (mx-prod-int-02.mail-002.prod.us-west-2.aws.redhat.com [10.30.177.15]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by mx-prod-mc-01.mail-002.prod.us-west-2.aws.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 3717E1956096; Sat, 3 May 2025 01:00:24 +0000 (UTC) Received: from fedora (unknown [10.72.116.4]) by mx-prod-int-02.mail-002.prod.us-west-2.aws.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 282111956094; Sat, 3 May 2025 01:00:18 +0000 (UTC) Date: Sat, 3 May 2025 09:00:13 +0800 From: Ming Lei To: Caleb Sander Mateos Cc: Jens Axboe , io-uring@vger.kernel.org, Pavel Begunkov , linux-block@vger.kernel.org, Uday Shankar , Keith Busch Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 3/7] io_uring: support to register bvec buffer to specified io_uring Message-ID: References: <20250428094420.1584420-1-ming.lei@redhat.com> <20250428094420.1584420-4-ming.lei@redhat.com> Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: io-uring@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit In-Reply-To: X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 3.0 on 10.30.177.15 On Fri, May 02, 2025 at 02:21:05PM -0700, Caleb Sander Mateos wrote: > On Fri, May 2, 2025 at 8:59 AM Ming Lei wrote: > > > > On Thu, May 01, 2025 at 06:31:03PM -0700, Caleb Sander Mateos wrote: > > > On Wed, Apr 30, 2025 at 8:34 AM Ming Lei wrote: > > > > > > > > On Mon, Apr 28, 2025 at 05:43:12PM -0700, Caleb Sander Mateos wrote: > > > > > On Mon, Apr 28, 2025 at 2:44 AM Ming Lei wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > Extend io_buffer_register_bvec() and io_buffer_unregister_bvec() for > > > > > > supporting to register/unregister bvec buffer to specified io_uring, > > > > > > which FD is usually passed from userspace. > > > > > > > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Ming Lei > > > > > > --- > > > > > > include/linux/io_uring/cmd.h | 4 ++ > > > > > > io_uring/rsrc.c | 83 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++--------- > > > > > > 2 files changed, 67 insertions(+), 20 deletions(-) > > > > > > > > > > > > diff --git a/include/linux/io_uring/cmd.h b/include/linux/io_uring/cmd.h > > > > > > index 78fa336a284b..7516fe5cd606 100644 > > > > > > --- a/include/linux/io_uring/cmd.h > > > > > > +++ b/include/linux/io_uring/cmd.h > > > > > > @@ -25,6 +25,10 @@ struct io_uring_cmd_data { > > > > > > > > > > > > struct io_buf_data { > > > > > > unsigned short index; > > > > > > + bool has_fd; > > > > > > + bool registered_fd; > > > > > > + > > > > > > + int ring_fd; > > > > > > struct request *rq; > > > > > > void (*release)(void *); > > > > > > }; > > > > > > diff --git a/io_uring/rsrc.c b/io_uring/rsrc.c > > > > > > index 5f8ab130a573..701dd33fecf7 100644 > > > > > > --- a/io_uring/rsrc.c > > > > > > +++ b/io_uring/rsrc.c > > > > > > @@ -969,21 +969,6 @@ static int __io_buffer_register_bvec(struct io_ring_ctx *ctx, > > > > > > return 0; > > > > > > } > > > > > > > > > > > > -int io_buffer_register_bvec(struct io_uring_cmd *cmd, > > > > > > - struct io_buf_data *buf, > > > > > > - unsigned int issue_flags) > > > > > > -{ > > > > > > - struct io_ring_ctx *ctx = cmd_to_io_kiocb(cmd)->ctx; > > > > > > - int ret; > > > > > > - > > > > > > - io_ring_submit_lock(ctx, issue_flags); > > > > > > - ret = __io_buffer_register_bvec(ctx, buf); > > > > > > - io_ring_submit_unlock(ctx, issue_flags); > > > > > > - > > > > > > - return ret; > > > > > > -} > > > > > > -EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(io_buffer_register_bvec); > > > > > > - > > > > > > static int __io_buffer_unregister_bvec(struct io_ring_ctx *ctx, > > > > > > struct io_buf_data *buf) > > > > > > { > > > > > > @@ -1006,19 +991,77 @@ static int __io_buffer_unregister_bvec(struct io_ring_ctx *ctx, > > > > > > return 0; > > > > > > } > > > > > > > > > > > > -int io_buffer_unregister_bvec(struct io_uring_cmd *cmd, > > > > > > - struct io_buf_data *buf, > > > > > > - unsigned int issue_flags) > > > > > > +static inline int do_reg_unreg_bvec(struct io_ring_ctx *ctx, > > > > > > + struct io_buf_data *buf, > > > > > > + unsigned int issue_flags, > > > > > > + bool reg) > > > > > > { > > > > > > - struct io_ring_ctx *ctx = cmd_to_io_kiocb(cmd)->ctx; > > > > > > int ret; > > > > > > > > > > > > io_ring_submit_lock(ctx, issue_flags); > > > > > > - ret = __io_buffer_unregister_bvec(ctx, buf); > > > > > > + if (reg) > > > > > > + ret = __io_buffer_register_bvec(ctx, buf); > > > > > > + else > > > > > > + ret = __io_buffer_unregister_bvec(ctx, buf); > > > > > > > > > > It feels like unifying __io_buffer_register_bvec() and > > > > > __io_buffer_unregister_bvec() would belong better in the prior patch > > > > > that changes their signatures. > > > > > > > > Can you share how to do above in previous patch? > > > > > > I was thinking you could define do_reg_unreg_bvec() in the previous > > > patch. It's a logical step once you've extracted out all the > > > differences between io_buffer_register_bvec() and > > > io_buffer_unregister_bvec() into the helpers > > > __io_buffer_register_bvec() and __io_buffer_unregister_bvec(). But > > > either way is fine. > > > > 'has_fd' and 'ring_fd' fields isn't added yet, the defined do_reg_unreg_bvec() > > could be quite simple, looks no big difference, I can do that... > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > io_ring_submit_unlock(ctx, issue_flags); > > > > > > > > > > > > return ret; > > > > > > } > > > > > > + > > > > > > +static int io_buffer_reg_unreg_bvec(struct io_ring_ctx *ctx, > > > > > > + struct io_buf_data *buf, > > > > > > + unsigned int issue_flags, > > > > > > + bool reg) > > > > > > +{ > > > > > > + struct io_ring_ctx *remote_ctx = ctx; > > > > > > + struct file *file = NULL; > > > > > > + int ret; > > > > > > + > > > > > > + if (buf->has_fd) { > > > > > > + file = io_uring_register_get_file(buf->ring_fd, buf->registered_fd); > > > > > > + if (IS_ERR(file)) > > > > > > + return PTR_ERR(file); > > > > > > > > > > It would be good to avoid the overhead of this lookup and > > > > > reference-counting in the I/O path. Would it be possible to move this > > > > > lookup to when UBLK_IO_FETCH_REQ (and UBLK_IO_COMMIT_AND_FETCH_REQ, if > > > > > it specifies a different ring_fd) is submitted? I guess that might > > > > > require storing an extra io_ring_ctx pointer in struct ublk_io. > > > > > > > > Let's start from the flexible way & simple implementation. > > > > > > > > Any optimization & improvement can be done as follow-up. > > > > > > Sure, we can start with this as-is. But I suspect the extra > > > reference-counting here will significantly decrease the benefit of the > > > auto-register register feature. > > > > The reference-counting should only be needed for registering buffer to > > external ring, which may have been slow because of the cross-ring thing... > > The current code is incrementing and decrementing the io_uring file > reference count even if the remote_ctx == ctx, right? I agree it Yes, but it can be changed to drop the inc/dec file reference easily since we have a flag field. > should definitely be possible to skip the reference count in that > case, as this code is already running in task work context for a > command on the io_uring. The current 'uring_cmd' instance holds one reference of the io_ring_ctx instance. > It should also be possible to avoid atomic > reference-counting in the UBLK_AUTO_BUF_REGISTERED_RING case too. For registering buffer to external io_ring, it is hard to avoid to grag the io_uring_ctx reference when specifying the io_uring_ctx via its FD. > > > > > Maybe we can start automatic buffer register for ubq_daemon context only, > > meantime allow to register buffer from external io_uring by adding per-io > > spin_lock, which may help the per-io task Uday is working on too. > > I'm not sure I understand why a spinlock would be required? In Uday's > patch set, each ublk_io still belongs to a single task. So no > additional locking should be required. I think it is very useful to allow to register io buffer in the other(non-ubq_daemon) io_uring context by the offload style. Especially the register/unregister io buffer uring_cmd is for handling target IO, which should have been issued in same context of target io handling. Without one per-io spinlock, it is hard to avoid one race you mentioned: https://lore.kernel.org/linux-block/aA2pNRkBhgKsofRP@fedora/#t in case of bad ublk server implementation. > > > > > And the interface still allow to support automatic buffer register to > > external io_uring since `ublk_auto_buf_reg` includes 'flags' field, we can > > enable it in future when efficient implementation is figured out. > > Sure, we can definitely start with support only for auto-registering > the buffer with the ublk command's own io_uring. Implementing a flag > in the future to specify a different io_uring seems like a good > approach. OK, I will send V2 by starting with auto-registering buffer to the ublk uring_cmd io_uring first. Thanks, Ming