From: David Ahern <[email protected]>
To: Willem de Bruijn <[email protected]>, Breno Leitao <[email protected]>
Cc: [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],
[email protected], [email protected]
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/5] add initial io_uring_cmd support for sockets
Date: Thu, 6 Apr 2023 20:46:38 -0600 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <[email protected]> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CA+FuTSf9LEhzjBey_Nm_-vN0ZjvtBSQkcDWS+5uBnLmr8Qh5uA@mail.gmail.com>
On 4/6/23 12:16 PM, Willem de Bruijn wrote:
> On Thu, Apr 6, 2023 at 11:59 AM Breno Leitao <[email protected]> wrote:
>>
>> On Thu, Apr 06, 2023 at 11:34:28AM -0400, Willem de Bruijn wrote:
>>> On Thu, Apr 6, 2023 at 10:45 AM Breno Leitao <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> From: Breno Leitao <[email protected]>
>>>>
>>>> This patchset creates the initial plumbing for a io_uring command for
>>>> sockets.
>>>>
>>>> For now, create two uring commands for sockets, SOCKET_URING_OP_SIOCOUTQ
>>>> and SOCKET_URING_OP_SIOCINQ. They are similar to ioctl operations
>>>> SIOCOUTQ and SIOCINQ. In fact, the code on the protocol side itself is
>>>> heavily based on the ioctl operations.
>>>
>>> This duplicates all the existing ioctl logic of each protocol.
>>>
>>> Can this just call the existing proto_ops.ioctl internally and translate from/to
>>> io_uring format as needed?
>>
>> This is doable, and we have two options in this case:
>>
>> 1) Create a ioctl core function that does not call `put_user()`, and
>> call it from both the `udp_ioctl` and `udp_uring_cmd`, doing the proper
>> translations. Something as:
>>
>> int udp_ioctl_core(struct sock *sk, int cmd, unsigned long arg)
>> {
>> int amount;
>> switch (cmd) {
>> case SIOCOUTQ: {
>> amount = sk_wmem_alloc_get(sk);
>> break;
>> }
>> case SIOCINQ: {
>> amount = max_t(int, 0, first_packet_length(sk));
>> break;
>> }
>> default:
>> return -ENOIOCTLCMD;
>> }
>> return amount;
>> }
>>
>> int udp_ioctl(struct sock *sk, int cmd, unsigned long arg)
>> {
>> int amount = udp_ioctl_core(sk, cmd, arg);
>>
>> return put_user(amount, (int __user *)arg);
>> }
>> EXPORT_SYMBOL(udp_ioctl);
>>
>>
>> 2) Create a function for each "case entry". This seems a bit silly for
>> UDP, but it makes more sense for other protocols. The code will look
>> something like:
>>
>> int udp_ioctl(struct sock *sk, int cmd, unsigned long arg)
>> {
>> switch (cmd) {
>> case SIOCOUTQ:
>> {
>> int amount = udp_ioctl_siocoutq();
>> return put_user(amount, (int __user *)arg);
>> }
>> ...
>> }
>>
>> What is the best approach?
>
> A, the issue is that sock->ops->ioctl directly call put_user.
>
> I was thinking just having sock_uring_cmd call sock->ops->ioctl, like
> sock_do_ioctl.
>
> But that would require those callbacks to return a negative error or
> positive integer, rather than calling put_user. And then move the
> put_user to sock_do_ioctl. Such a change is at least as much code
> change as your series. Though without the ending up with code
> duplication. It also works only if all ioctls only put_user of integer
> size. That's true for TCP, UDP and RAW, but not sure if true more
> broadly.
>
> Another approach may be to pass another argument to the ioctl
> callbacks, whether to call put_user or return the integer and let the
> caller take care of the output to user. This could possibly be
> embedded in the a high-order bit of the cmd, so that it fails on ioctl
> callbacks that do not support this mode.
>
> Of the two approaches you suggest, I find the first preferable.
The first approach sounds better to me and it would be good to avoid
io_uring details in the networking code (ie., cmd->sqe->cmd_op).
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2023-04-07 2:46 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 52+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2023-04-06 14:43 [PATCH 0/5] add initial io_uring_cmd support for sockets Breno Leitao
2023-04-06 14:43 ` [RFC PATCH 1/4] net: wire up support for file_operations->uring_cmd() Breno Leitao
2023-04-06 14:43 ` [RFC PATCH 2/4] net: add uring_cmd callback to UDP Breno Leitao
2023-04-11 12:54 ` Pavel Begunkov
2023-04-06 14:43 ` [RFC PATCH 3/4] net: add uring_cmd callback to TCP Breno Leitao
2023-04-06 14:43 ` [RFC PATCH 4/4] net: add uring_cmd callback to raw "protocol" Breno Leitao
2023-04-06 15:34 ` [PATCH 0/5] add initial io_uring_cmd support for sockets Willem de Bruijn
2023-04-06 15:59 ` Breno Leitao
2023-04-06 18:16 ` Willem de Bruijn
2023-04-07 2:46 ` David Ahern [this message]
2023-04-11 12:00 ` Breno Leitao
2023-04-11 14:36 ` David Ahern
2023-04-11 14:41 ` Jens Axboe
2023-04-11 14:51 ` Willem de Bruijn
2023-04-11 14:54 ` Jens Axboe
2023-04-11 15:00 ` Willem de Bruijn
2023-04-11 15:06 ` Jens Axboe
2023-04-11 15:24 ` Willem de Bruijn
2023-04-11 15:28 ` Jens Axboe
2023-04-12 13:53 ` Breno Leitao
2023-04-12 14:28 ` Willem de Bruijn
2023-04-13 0:02 ` Breno Leitao
2023-04-13 14:24 ` Willem de Bruijn
2023-04-13 14:45 ` Jakub Kicinski
2023-04-13 14:57 ` David Laight
2023-04-18 13:23 ` Breno Leitao
2023-04-18 19:41 ` Willem de Bruijn
2023-04-20 14:43 ` Breno Leitao
2023-04-20 16:48 ` Willem de Bruijn
2023-04-11 15:10 ` David Ahern
2023-04-11 15:17 ` Jens Axboe
2023-04-11 15:27 ` David Ahern
2023-04-11 15:29 ` Jens Axboe
2023-04-12 7:39 ` David Laight
2023-04-06 16:41 ` Keith Busch
2023-04-06 16:49 ` Jens Axboe
2023-04-06 16:58 ` Breno Leitao
2023-04-06 16:57 ` [PATCH RFC] io_uring: Pass whole sqe to commands Breno Leitao
2023-04-07 18:51 ` Keith Busch
2023-04-11 12:22 ` Breno Leitao
2023-04-11 12:39 ` Pavel Begunkov
2023-04-13 2:56 ` Ming Lei
2023-04-13 16:47 ` Breno Leitao
2023-04-14 2:12 ` Ming Lei
2023-04-14 13:12 ` Pavel Begunkov
2023-04-14 13:59 ` Ming Lei
2023-04-14 14:56 ` Pavel Begunkov
2023-04-16 9:51 ` Ming Lei
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2023-05-02 9:21 [PATCH 0/5] add initial io_uring_cmd support for sockets Adrien Delorme
2023-05-02 13:03 ` Pavel Begunkov
2023-05-03 13:11 ` Adrien Delorme
2023-05-03 13:27 ` David Laight
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] \
[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