io-uring.vger.kernel.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Mark Papadakis <markuspapadakis@icloud.com>
To: Jens Axboe <axboe@kernel.dk>
Cc: io-uring@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: io_uring and spurious wake-ups from eventfd
Date: Wed, 8 Jan 2020 09:36:17 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <4DED8D2F-8F0B-46FB-800D-FEC3F2A5B553@icloud.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <60360091-ffce-fc8b-50d5-1a20fecaf047@kernel.dk>



> On 7 Jan 2020, at 10:34 PM, Jens Axboe <axboe@kernel.dk> wrote:
> 
> On 1/7/20 1:26 PM, Jens Axboe wrote:
>> On 1/7/20 8:55 AM, Mark Papadakis wrote:
>>> This is perhaps an odd request, but if it’s trivial to implement
>>> support for this described feature, it could help others like it ‘d
>>> help me (I ‘ve been experimenting with io_uring for some time now).
>>> 
>>> Being able to register an eventfd with an io_uring context is very
>>> handy, if you e.g have some sort of reactor thread multiplexing I/O
>>> using epoll etc, where you want to be notified when there are pending
>>> CQEs to drain. The problem, such as it is, is that this can result in
>>> un-necessary/spurious wake-ups.
>>> 
>>> If, for example, you are monitoring some sockets for EPOLLIN, and when
>>> poll says you have pending bytes to read from their sockets, and said
>>> sockets are non-blocking, and for each some reported event you reserve
>>> an SQE for preadv() to read that data and then you io_uring_enter to
>>> submit the SQEs, because the data is readily available, as soon as
>>> io_uring_enter returns, you will have your completions available -
>>> which you can process.  The “problem” is that poll will wake up
>>> immediately thereafter in the next reactor loop iteration because
>>> eventfd was tripped (which is reasonable but un-necessary).
>>> 
>>> What if there was a flag for io_uring_setup() so that the eventfd
>>> would only be tripped for CQEs that were processed asynchronously, or,
>>> if that’s non-trivial, only for CQEs that reference file FDs?
>>> 
>>> That’d help with that spurious wake-up.
>> 
>> One easy way to do that would be for the application to signal that it
>> doesn't want eventfd notifications for certain requests. Like using an
>> IOSQE_ flag for that. Then you could set that on the requests you submit
>> in response to triggering an eventfd event.
> 


Thanks Jens,

This is great, but perhaps there is a somewhat slightly more optimal way to do this.
Ideally, io_uring should trip the eventfd if there are any new completions available, that haven’t been produced
In the context of an io_uring_enter(). That is to say, if any SQEs can be immediately served (because data is readily available in
Buffers/caches in the kernel), then their respective CQEs will be produced in the context of that io_uring_enter() that submitted said SQEs(and thus the CQEs can be processed immediately after io_uring_enter() returns). 
So, if any CQEs are placed in the respective ring at any other time, but not during an io_uring_enter() call, then it means those completions were produced asynchronously, and thus the eventfd can be tripped, otherwise, there is no need to trip the eventfd at all.

e.g (pseudocode):
void produce_completion(cfq_ctx *ctx, const bool in_io_uring_enter_ctx) {
        cqe_ring_push(cqe_from_ctx(ctx));
        if (false == in_io_uring_enter_ctx && eventfd_registered()) {
                trip_iouring_eventfd();
        } else {
                // don't bother
        }
}

@markpapadakis

  reply	other threads:[~2020-01-08  7:35 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 [this message]
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

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 \
    --in-reply-to=4DED8D2F-8F0B-46FB-800D-FEC3F2A5B553@icloud.com \
    --to=markuspapadakis@icloud.com \
    --cc=axboe@kernel.dk \
    --cc=io-uring@vger.kernel.org \
    /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;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).