From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 14CA5C433FE for ; Thu, 20 Oct 2022 13:47:39 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S229874AbiJTNri (ORCPT ); Thu, 20 Oct 2022 09:47:38 -0400 Received: from lindbergh.monkeyblade.net ([23.128.96.19]:60320 "EHLO lindbergh.monkeyblade.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S229905AbiJTNrg (ORCPT ); Thu, 20 Oct 2022 09:47:36 -0400 Received: from mail-wm1-x331.google.com (mail-wm1-x331.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:4864:20::331]) by lindbergh.monkeyblade.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 3D856188100; Thu, 20 Oct 2022 06:47:34 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-wm1-x331.google.com with SMTP id l16-20020a05600c4f1000b003c6c0d2a445so2215879wmq.4; Thu, 20 Oct 2022 06:47:34 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20210112; h=content-transfer-encoding:in-reply-to:from:references:cc:to :content-language:subject:user-agent:mime-version:date:message-id :from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:reply-to; bh=DUeyLKFEKZCoWrqjotl/UIMGSQmHxC+SlSV0Q+kjoMw=; b=qaEGbRisWRW8Ap+sF4YBUanz6C0QzQO3OQDrX9Y2bElYk1m4nLKiTK9gpwzE98LryU rMdrPExY/fAHFiU3Ih9sNY05yXt6bkRkzzzuVoRHTi7BX23iK5pFGa1dpvBwdWtGaNw9 +N3LOMivIuqBZ5UMEoZzmkyPyuUiqH4yP1eP5EvDYB81mP9Vx86xA66URpeJ3CGFBHze 1N3eoU5Ptxiueee20PIdvLo4icJegq9ZkTe8xyjPSassxfD90+o30Jo1Vo1OATsRBadR QHEpIr//PtTXj92Om4i6rug9hog78sZbGvbWbMVE7ZUvrwwZacuXWiLtwsU0kkGk1HWH JJKA== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20210112; h=content-transfer-encoding:in-reply-to:from:references:cc:to :content-language:subject:user-agent:mime-version:date:message-id :x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:reply-to; bh=DUeyLKFEKZCoWrqjotl/UIMGSQmHxC+SlSV0Q+kjoMw=; b=V9xuP5xAtyErG/c/yk8BWZS+++vEPhEZC8W0We+jF/mpqT29A7IACT6hm4VA/98OTw 9V4xF9sxXXu5hqaffgFnQo8lkMLiHDNUXCvQCYoOvc5ZHs63dkPpMDzF0QxbOVApRONh 6kG6djQTJR4duHPhvGMQ2lHxO5c3ZM0/fXwNRtkYACZ+4TKLfupFpRmF35svcaFt8du6 wJA5nrwb7voQanYf93qnuLDb5/rZGllgHRfdb4zpZrVwUER47lf+/QUyuO3DBdyOdyJX kjGFnmUXv+NpHkuR1vSkHr7F2PH9oKy2ASYZVzf7K2KkZk25ouYUS3NhkCU6+5yNF2pq 7lag== X-Gm-Message-State: ACrzQf1qGnvw23tkjX2MFywcj58TXXitRPyMpfkNSJg1ymHxdJmcF1q6 GhC5DpGyKVacaFG+XKu3MzK7CkXdd/c= X-Google-Smtp-Source: AMsMyM6YIyrigCAhrxtC8TLi3THdusYlaVB9magdMAYYNjCg7nYwqJHCd71yRFHRUJNafYtneD8eTQ== X-Received: by 2002:a05:600c:3b88:b0:3c6:cef8:8465 with SMTP id n8-20020a05600c3b8800b003c6cef88465mr29896271wms.64.1666273652289; Thu, 20 Oct 2022 06:47:32 -0700 (PDT) Received: from ?IPV6:2620:10d:c096:310::22ef? ([2620:10d:c092:600::2:93dd]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id f7-20020adfc987000000b0022e04bfa661sm16520654wrh.59.2022.10.20.06.47.31 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 bits=128/128); Thu, 20 Oct 2022 06:47:31 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: Date: Thu, 20 Oct 2022 14:46:02 +0100 MIME-Version: 1.0 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:102.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/102.3.1 Subject: Re: IORING_SEND_NOTIF_REPORT_USAGE (was Re: IORING_CQE_F_COPIED) Content-Language: en-US To: Stefan Metzmacher , io-uring , Jens Axboe Cc: Jakub Kicinski , netdev , Dylan Yudaken References: <4385ba84-55dd-6b08-0ca7-6b4a43f9d9a2@samba.org> <6f0a9137-2d2b-7294-f59f-0fcf9cdfc72d@gmail.com> <4bbf6bc1-ee4b-8758-7860-a06f57f35d14@samba.org> From: Pavel Begunkov In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: io-uring@vger.kernel.org On 10/20/22 11:04, Stefan Metzmacher wrote: > Hi Pavel, [...] > > So far I came up with a IORING_SEND_NOTIF_REPORT_USAGE opt-in flag > and the reporting is done in cqe.res with IORING_NOTIF_USAGE_ZC_USED (0x00000001) > and/or IORING_NOTIF_USAGE_ZC_COPIED (0x8000000). So the caller is also > able to notice that some parts were able to use zero copy, while other > fragments were copied. Are we really interested in multihoming and probably some very edge cases? I'd argue we're not and it should be a single bool hint indicating whether zc is viable or not. It can do more complex calculations _if_ needed, e.g. looking inside skb's and figure out how many bytes were copied but as for me it should better be turned into a single bool in the end. Could also be the number of bytes copied, but I don't think we can't have the accuracy for that (e.g. what we're going to return if some protocol duplicates an skb and sends to 2 different devices or is processing it in a pipeline?) So the question is what is the use case for having 2 flags? btw, now we've got another example why the report flag is a good idea, we can't use cqe.res unconditionally because we want to have a "one CQE per request" mode, but it's fine if we make it and the report flag mutually exclusive. > I haven't tested it yet, but I want to post it early... > > What do you think? Keeping in mind potential backporting let's make it as simple and short as possible first and then do optimisations on top. > diff --git a/include/uapi/linux/io_uring.h b/include/uapi/linux/io_uring.h > index ab7458033ee3..751fc4eff8d1 100644 > --- a/include/uapi/linux/io_uring.h > +++ b/include/uapi/linux/io_uring.h > @@ -296,10 +296,28 @@ enum io_uring_op { >   * >   * IORING_RECVSEND_FIXED_BUF    Use registered buffers, the index is stored in >   *                the buf_index field. > + * > + * IORING_SEND_NOTIF_REPORT_USAGE > + *                If SEND[MSG]_ZC should report > + *                the zerocopy usage in cqe.res > + *                for the IORING_CQE_F_NOTIF cqe. > + *                IORING_NOTIF_USAGE_ZC_USED if zero copy was used > + *                (at least partially). > + *                IORING_NOTIF_USAGE_ZC_COPIED if data was copied > + *                (at least partially). >   */ >  #define IORING_RECVSEND_POLL_FIRST    (1U << 0) >  #define IORING_RECV_MULTISHOT        (1U << 1) >  #define IORING_RECVSEND_FIXED_BUF    (1U << 2) > +#define IORING_SEND_NOTIF_REPORT_USAGE    (1U << 3) > + > +/* > + * cqe.res for IORING_CQE_F_NOTIF if > + * IORING_SEND_NOTIF_REPORT_USAGE was requested > + */ > +#define IORING_NOTIF_USAGE_ZC_USED    (1U << 0) > +#define IORING_NOTIF_USAGE_ZC_COPIED    (1U << 31) > + > >  /* >   * accept flags stored in sqe->ioprio > diff --git a/io_uring/net.c b/io_uring/net.c > index 735eec545115..a79d7d349e19 100644 > --- a/io_uring/net.c > +++ b/io_uring/net.c > @@ -946,9 +946,11 @@ int io_send_zc_prep(struct io_kiocb *req, const struct io_uring_sqe *sqe) > >      zc->flags = READ_ONCE(sqe->ioprio); >      if (zc->flags & ~(IORING_RECVSEND_POLL_FIRST | > -              IORING_RECVSEND_FIXED_BUF)) > +              IORING_RECVSEND_FIXED_BUF | > +              IORING_SEND_NOTIF_REPORT_USAGE)) >          return -EINVAL; > -    notif = zc->notif = io_alloc_notif(ctx); > +    notif = zc->notif = io_alloc_notif(ctx, > +                       zc->flags & IORING_SEND_NOTIF_REPORT_USAGE); >      if (!notif) >          return -ENOMEM; >      notif->cqe.user_data = req->cqe.user_data; > diff --git a/io_uring/notif.c b/io_uring/notif.c > index e37c6569d82e..3844e3c8ad7e 100644 > --- a/io_uring/notif.c > +++ b/io_uring/notif.c > @@ -3,13 +3,14 @@ >  #include >  #include >  #include > +#include Is it needed? >  #include > >  #include "io_uring.h" >  #include "notif.h" >  #include "rsrc.h" > > -static void __io_notif_complete_tw(struct io_kiocb *notif, bool *locked) > +static inline void __io_notif_complete_tw(struct io_kiocb *notif, bool *locked) Let's remove this hunk with inlining and do it later >  { >      struct io_notif_data *nd = io_notif_to_data(notif); >      struct io_ring_ctx *ctx = notif->ctx; > @@ -21,20 +22,46 @@ static void __io_notif_complete_tw(struct io_kiocb *notif, bool *locked) >      io_req_task_complete(notif, locked); >  } > > -static void io_uring_tx_zerocopy_callback(struct sk_buff *skb, > -                      struct ubuf_info *uarg, > -                      bool success) > +static inline void io_uring_tx_zerocopy_callback(struct sk_buff *skb, > +                         struct ubuf_info *uarg, > +                         bool success) This one as well. >  { >      struct io_notif_data *nd = container_of(uarg, struct io_notif_data, uarg); >      struct io_kiocb *notif = cmd_to_io_kiocb(nd); > >      if (refcount_dec_and_test(&uarg->refcnt)) { > -        notif->io_task_work.func = __io_notif_complete_tw; >          io_req_task_work_add(notif); >      } >  } > > -struct io_kiocb *io_alloc_notif(struct io_ring_ctx *ctx) > +static void __io_notif_complete_tw_report_usage(struct io_kiocb *notif, bool *locked) Just shove all that into __io_notif_complete_tw(). > +{ > +    struct io_notif_data *nd = io_notif_to_data(notif); > + > +    if (likely(nd->zc_used)) > +        notif->cqe.res |= IORING_NOTIF_USAGE_ZC_USED; > + > +    if (unlikely(nd->zc_copied)) > +        notif->cqe.res |= IORING_NOTIF_USAGE_ZC_COPIED; > + > +    __io_notif_complete_tw(notif, locked); > +} > + > +static void io_uring_tx_zerocopy_callback_report_usage(struct sk_buff *skb, > +                            struct ubuf_info *uarg, > +                            bool success) > +{ > +    struct io_notif_data *nd = container_of(uarg, struct io_notif_data, uarg); > + > +    if (success && !nd->zc_used && skb) > +        nd->zc_used = true; > +    else if (unlikely(!success && !nd->zc_copied)) > +        nd->zc_copied = true; It's fine but racy, so let's WRITE_ONCE() to indicate it. > + > +    io_uring_tx_zerocopy_callback(skb, uarg, success); > +} > + > +struct io_kiocb *io_alloc_notif(struct io_ring_ctx *ctx, bool report_usage) >      __must_hold(&ctx->uring_lock) And it's better to kill this argument and init zc_used/copied unconditionally. >  { >      struct io_kiocb *notif; > @@ -54,7 +81,14 @@ struct io_kiocb *io_alloc_notif(struct io_ring_ctx *ctx) >      nd = io_notif_to_data(notif); >      nd->account_pages = 0; >      nd->uarg.flags = SKBFL_ZEROCOPY_FRAG | SKBFL_DONT_ORPHAN; > -    nd->uarg.callback = io_uring_tx_zerocopy_callback; > +    if (report_usage) { > +        nd->zc_used = nd->zc_copied = false; > +        nd->uarg.callback = io_uring_tx_zerocopy_callback_report_usage; > +        notif->io_task_work.func = __io_notif_complete_tw_report_usage; > +    } else { > +        nd->uarg.callback = io_uring_tx_zerocopy_callback; > +        notif->io_task_work.func = __io_notif_complete_tw; > +    } >      refcount_set(&nd->uarg.refcnt, 1); >      return notif; >  } > @@ -66,7 +100,6 @@ void io_notif_flush(struct io_kiocb *notif) > >      /* drop slot's master ref */ >      if (refcount_dec_and_test(&nd->uarg.refcnt)) { > -        notif->io_task_work.func = __io_notif_complete_tw; >          io_req_task_work_add(notif); >      } >  } > diff --git a/io_uring/notif.h b/io_uring/notif.h > index 5b4d710c8ca5..5ac7a2745e52 100644 > --- a/io_uring/notif.h > +++ b/io_uring/notif.h > @@ -13,10 +13,12 @@ struct io_notif_data { >      struct file        *file; >      struct ubuf_info    uarg; >      unsigned long        account_pages; > +    bool            zc_used; > +    bool            zc_copied; IIRC io_notif_data is fully packed in 6.1, so placing zc_{used,copied} there might complicate backporting (if any). We can place them in io_kiocb directly and move in 6.2. Alternatively account_pages doesn't have to be long. >  }; > >  void io_notif_flush(struct io_kiocb *notif); > -struct io_kiocb *io_alloc_notif(struct io_ring_ctx *ctx); > +struct io_kiocb *io_alloc_notif(struct io_ring_ctx *ctx, bool report_usage); > >  static inline struct io_notif_data *io_notif_to_data(struct io_kiocb *notif) >  { > -- Pavel Begunkov