public inbox for [email protected]
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Bijan Mottahedeh <[email protected]>
To: Jens Axboe <[email protected]>, Pavel Begunkov <[email protected]>
Cc: io-uring <[email protected]>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/1] io_uring: use proper references for fallback_req locking
Date: Mon, 4 May 2020 12:16:24 -0700	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <[email protected]> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <[email protected]>

On 5/4/2020 9:12 AM, Jens Axboe wrote:
> On 5/3/20 6:52 AM, Pavel Begunkov wrote:
>> On 30/04/2020 17:52, Jens Axboe wrote:
>>> On 4/29/20 6:47 PM, Bijan Mottahedeh wrote:
>>>> Use ctx->fallback_req address for test_and_set_bit_lock() and
>>>> clear_bit_unlock().
>>> Thanks, applied.
>>>
>> How about getting rid of it? As once was fairly noticed, we're screwed in many
>> other ways in case of OOM. Otherwise we at least need to make async context
>> allocation more resilient.
> Not sure how best to handle it, it really sucks to have things fall apart
> under high memory pressure, a condition that isn't that rare in production
> systems. But as you say, it's only a half measure currently. We could have
> the fallback request have req->io already allocated, though. That would
> provide what we need for guaranteed forward progress, even in the presence
> of OOM conditions.
>
A somewhat related question, would it make sense to have (configurable) 
pre-allocated requests, to be used first if low latency is a priority 
for a ring, or would the allocation overhead be negligible compared to 
the actual I/O?  This would be the flip side of fallback in a sense.

Thanks.

--bijan

--bijan

      parent reply	other threads:[~2020-05-04 19:16 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 4+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
     [not found] <[email protected]>
     [not found] ` <[email protected]>
2020-05-03 12:52   ` [PATCH 1/1] io_uring: use proper references for fallback_req locking Pavel Begunkov
2020-05-04 16:12     ` Jens Axboe
2020-05-04 16:28       ` Pavel Begunkov
2020-05-04 19:16       ` Bijan Mottahedeh [this message]

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] \
    /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