public inbox for [email protected]
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Jens Axboe <[email protected]>
To: Daurnimator <[email protected]>
Cc: Mark Papadakis <[email protected]>, [email protected]
Subject: Re: io_uring and spurious wake-ups from eventfd
Date: Thu, 9 Jan 2020 08:14:26 -0700	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <[email protected]> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAEnbY+fSuT+bBztpOUNJY3cq2pZ6tbFvKkSUeY+mEVwjtdNDow@mail.gmail.com>

On 1/8/20 11:09 PM, Daurnimator wrote:
> On Thu, 9 Jan 2020 at 03:25, Jens Axboe <[email protected]> wrote:
>> I see what you're saying, so essentially only trigger eventfd
>> notifications if the completions happen async. That does make a lot of
>> sense, and it would be cleaner than having to flag this per request as
>> well. I think we'd still need to make that opt-in as it changes the
>> behavior of it.
>>
>> The best way to do that would be to add IORING_REGISTER_EVENTFD_ASYNC or
>> something like that. Does the exact same thing as
>> IORING_REGISTER_EVENTFD, but only triggers it if completions happen
>> async.
>>
>> What do you think?
> 
> 
> Why would a new opcode be cleaner than using a flag for the existing
> EVENTFD opcode?

A few reasons I can think of:

1) We don't consume an IOSQE flag, which is a pretty sparse resource.
2) This is generally behavior where you either want one or the other,
   not a mix. Hence a general setup/modify flag makes more sense to me.

-- 
Jens Axboe


      reply	other threads:[~2020-01-09 15:14 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 11+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2020-01-07 15:55 io_uring and spurious wake-ups from eventfd Mark Papadakis
2020-01-07 20:26 ` Jens Axboe
2020-01-07 20:34   ` Jens Axboe
2020-01-08  7:36     ` Mark Papadakis
2020-01-08 16:24       ` Jens Axboe
2020-01-08 16:46         ` Mark Papadakis
2020-01-08 16:50           ` Jens Axboe
2020-01-08 17:20             ` Jens Axboe
2020-01-08 18:08               ` Jens Axboe
2020-01-09  6:09         ` Daurnimator
2020-01-09 15:14           ` Jens Axboe [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