From: Pavel Begunkov <[email protected]>
To: Jens Axboe <[email protected]>,
[email protected], [email protected]
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] io_uring: trigger timeout after any sqe->off CQEs
Date: Thu, 23 Apr 2020 01:20:47 +0300 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <[email protected]> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <[email protected]>
On 20/04/2020 23:15, Pavel Begunkov wrote:
> On 20/04/2020 23:12, Pavel Begunkov wrote:
>> On 20/04/2020 22:40, Jens Axboe wrote:
>>> On 4/18/20 11:20 AM, Pavel Begunkov wrote:
>>>> +static void __io_flush_timeouts(struct io_ring_ctx *ctx)
>>>> +{
>>>> + u32 end, start;
>>>> +
>>>> + start = end = ctx->cached_cq_tail;
>>>> + do {
>>>> + struct io_kiocb *req = list_first_entry(&ctx->timeout_list,
>>>> + struct io_kiocb, list);
>>>> +
>>>> + if (req->flags & REQ_F_TIMEOUT_NOSEQ)
>>>> + break;
>>>> + /*
>>>> + * multiple timeouts may have the same target,
>>>> + * check that @req is in [first_tail, cur_tail]
>>>> + */
>>>> + if (!io_check_in_range(req->timeout.target_cq, start, end))
>>>> + break;
>>>> +
>>>> + list_del_init(&req->list);
>>>> + io_kill_timeout(req);
>>>> + end = ctx->cached_cq_tail;
>>>> + } while (!list_empty(&ctx->timeout_list));
>>>> +}
>>>> +
>>>> static void io_commit_cqring(struct io_ring_ctx *ctx)
>>>> {
>>>> struct io_kiocb *req;
>>>>
>>>> - while ((req = io_get_timeout_req(ctx)) != NULL)
>>>> - io_kill_timeout(req);
>>>> + if (!list_empty(&ctx->timeout_list))
>>>> + __io_flush_timeouts(ctx);
>>>>
>>>> __io_commit_cqring(ctx);
>>>>
>>>
>>> Any chance we can do this without having to iterate timeouts on the
>>> completion path?
>>>
>>
>> If you mean the one in __io_flush_timeouts(), then no, unless we forbid timeouts
>> with identical target sequences + some extra constraints. The loop there is not
>> new, it iterates only over timeouts, that need to be completed, and removes
>> them. That's amortised O(1).
>
> We can think about adding unlock/lock, if that's what you are thinking about.
>
>
>> On the other hand, there was a loop in io_timeout_fn() doing in total O(n^2),
>> and it was killed by this patch.
>
Any thoughts on this?
I'll return fixing the last timeout bug I saw, but I'd prefer to know on top of
what to do that.
--
Pavel Begunkov
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2020-04-22 22:21 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 9+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2020-04-18 17:20 [PATCH 0/2] CQ vs SQ timeout accounting Pavel Begunkov
2020-04-18 17:20 ` [PATCH 1/2] io_uring: trigger timeout after any sqe->off CQEs Pavel Begunkov
2020-04-20 19:40 ` Jens Axboe
2020-04-20 20:12 ` Pavel Begunkov
2020-04-20 20:15 ` Pavel Begunkov
2020-04-22 22:20 ` Pavel Begunkov [this message]
2020-04-22 22:23 ` Jens Axboe
2020-04-22 22:51 ` Pavel Begunkov
2020-04-18 17:20 ` [PATCH 2/2] io_uring: don't trigger timeout with another t-out Pavel Begunkov
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