public inbox for [email protected]
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Jens Axboe <[email protected]>
To: Pavel Begunkov <[email protected]>,
	David Wei <[email protected]>,
	[email protected], [email protected]
Cc: Jakub Kicinski <[email protected]>, Paolo Abeni <[email protected]>,
	"David S. Miller" <[email protected]>,
	Eric Dumazet <[email protected]>,
	Jesper Dangaard Brouer <[email protected]>,
	David Ahern <[email protected]>,
	Mina Almasry <[email protected]>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH v4 13/16] io_uring: add io_recvzc request
Date: Thu, 14 Mar 2024 10:14:24 -0600	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <[email protected]> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <[email protected]>

(Apparently this went out without my comments attached, only one thing
worth noting so repeating that)

>>> @@ -695,7 +701,7 @@ static inline bool io_recv_finish(struct io_kiocb *req, int *ret,
>>>       unsigned int cflags;
>>>         cflags = io_put_kbuf(req, issue_flags);
>>> -    if (msg->msg_inq && msg->msg_inq != -1)
>>> +    if (msg && msg->msg_inq && msg->msg_inq != -1)
>>>           cflags |= IORING_CQE_F_SOCK_NONEMPTY;
>>>         if (!(req->flags & REQ_F_APOLL_MULTISHOT)) {
>>> @@ -723,7 +729,7 @@ static inline bool io_recv_finish(struct io_kiocb *req, int *ret,
>>>               goto enobufs;
>>>             /* Known not-empty or unknown state, retry */
>>> -        if (cflags & IORING_CQE_F_SOCK_NONEMPTY || msg->msg_inq == -1) {
>>> +        if (cflags & IORING_CQE_F_SOCK_NONEMPTY || (msg && msg->msg_inq == -1)) {
>>>               if (sr->nr_multishot_loops++ < MULTISHOT_MAX_RETRY)
>>>                   return false;
>>>               /* mshot retries exceeded, force a requeue */
>>
>> Maybe refactor this a bit so that you don't need to add these NULL
>> checks? That seems pretty fragile, hard to read, and should be doable
>> without extra checks.
> 
> That chunk can be completely thrown away, we're not using
> io_recv_finish() here anymore

OK good!

>>> @@ -1053,6 +1058,85 @@ struct io_zc_rx_ifq *io_zc_verify_sock(struct io_kiocb *req,
>>>       return ifq;
>>>   }
>>>   +int io_recvzc_prep(struct io_kiocb *req, const struct io_uring_sqe *sqe)
>>> +{
>>> +    struct io_recvzc *zc = io_kiocb_to_cmd(req, struct io_recvzc);
>>> +
>>> +    /* non-iopoll defer_taskrun only */
>>> +    if (!req->ctx->task_complete)
>>> +        return -EINVAL;
>>
>> What's the reasoning behind this?
> 
> CQ locking, see the comment a couple lines below

My question here was more towards "is this something we want to do".
Maybe this is just a temporary work-around and it's nothing to discuss,
but I'm not sure we want to have opcodes only work on certain ring
setups.


-- 
Jens Axboe



  parent reply	other threads:[~2024-03-14 16:14 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 27+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2024-03-12 21:44 [RFC PATCH v4 00/16] Zero copy Rx using io_uring David Wei
2024-03-12 21:44 ` [RFC PATCH v4 01/16] net: generalise pp provider params passing David Wei
2024-03-12 21:44 ` [RFC PATCH v4 02/16] io_uring: delayed cqe commit David Wei
2024-03-12 21:44 ` [RFC PATCH v4 03/16] net: page_pool: add ->scrub mem provider callback David Wei
2024-03-12 21:44 ` [RFC PATCH v4 04/16] io_uring: separate header for exported net bits David Wei
2024-03-12 21:44 ` [RFC PATCH v4 05/16] io_uring: introduce interface queue David Wei
2024-03-12 21:44 ` [RFC PATCH v4 06/16] io_uring: add mmap support for shared ifq ringbuffers David Wei
2024-03-12 21:44 ` [RFC PATCH v4 07/16] netdev: add XDP_SETUP_ZC_RX command David Wei
2024-03-12 21:44 ` [RFC PATCH v4 08/16] io_uring: setup ZC for an Rx queue when registering an ifq David Wei
2024-03-12 21:44 ` [RFC PATCH v4 09/16] io_uring/zcrx: implement socket registration David Wei
2024-03-12 21:44 ` [RFC PATCH v4 10/16] io_uring: add zero copy buf representation and pool David Wei
2024-03-12 21:44 ` [RFC PATCH v4 11/16] io_uring: implement pp memory provider for zc rx David Wei
2024-03-12 21:44 ` [RFC PATCH v4 12/16] io_uring/zcrx: implement PP_FLAG_DMA_* handling David Wei
2024-03-12 21:44 ` [RFC PATCH v4 13/16] io_uring: add io_recvzc request David Wei
2024-03-13 20:25   ` Jens Axboe
2024-03-13 20:26     ` Pavel Begunkov
2024-03-13 21:03       ` Jens Axboe
2024-03-14 16:14       ` Jens Axboe [this message]
2024-03-15 17:34         ` Pavel Begunkov
2024-03-15 18:38           ` Jens Axboe
2024-03-15 23:52             ` Pavel Begunkov
2024-03-16 16:59               ` Jens Axboe
2024-03-17 21:22                 ` Pavel Begunkov
2024-03-17 21:30                   ` Jens Axboe
2024-03-12 21:44 ` [RFC PATCH v4 14/16] net: execute custom callback from napi David Wei
2024-03-12 21:44 ` [RFC PATCH v4 15/16] io_uring/zcrx: add copy fallback David Wei
2024-03-12 21:44 ` [RFC PATCH v4 16/16] veth: add support for io_uring zc rx David Wei

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] \
    /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