IO-Uring Archive on lore.kernel.org
 help / color / Atom feed
From: Pavel Begunkov <asml.silence@gmail.com>
To: Jens Axboe <axboe@kernel.dk>, io-uring <io-uring@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] io-wq: handle hashed writes in chains
Date: Mon, 23 Mar 2020 11:38:04 +0300
Message-ID: <d316093f-46cd-7ae0-714a-7b90f3df5f1e@gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <d2093dbe-7c75-340b-4c99-c88bdae450e6@kernel.dk>

[-- Attachment #1.1: Type: text/plain, Size: 2508 bytes --]

On 23/03/2020 04:37, Jens Axboe wrote:
> On 3/22/20 2:25 PM, Pavel Begunkov wrote:
>> On 22/03/2020 22:51, Jens Axboe wrote:
>>> commit f1d96a8fcbbbb22d4fbc1d69eaaa678bbb0ff6e2
>>> Author: Pavel Begunkov <asml.silence@gmail.com>
>>> Date:   Fri Mar 13 22:29:14 2020 +0300
>>>
>>>     io_uring: NULL-deref for IOSQE_{ASYNC,DRAIN}
>>>
>>> which is what I ran into as well last week...
>>
>> I picked it before testing
>>
>>> The extra memory isn't a bit deal, it's very minor. My main concern
>>> would be fairness, since we'd then be grabbing non-contig hashed chunks,
>>> before we did not. May not be a concern as long as we ensure the
>>> non-hasned (and differently hashed) work can proceed in parallel. For my
>>> end, I deliberately added:
>>
>> Don't think it's really a problem, all ordering/scheduling is up to
>> users (i.e.  io_uring), and it can't infinitely postpone a work,
>> because it's processing spliced requests without taking more, even if
>> new ones hash to the same bit.
> 
> I don't disagree with you, just wanted to bring it up!

Sure, there is a lot to think about. E.g. I don't like this reenqueueing,
and if all other thread have enough work to do, then it can avoided, but don't
want to over-complicate.


> 
>>> +	/* already have hashed work, let new worker get this */
>>> +	if (ret) {
>>> +		struct io_wqe_acct *acct;
>>> +
>>> +		/* get new worker for unhashed, if none now */
>>> +		acct = io_work_get_acct(wqe, work);
>>> +		if (!atomic_read(&acct->nr_running))
>>> +			io_wqe_wake_worker(wqe, acct);
>>> +		break;
>>> +	}
>>>
>>> to try and improve that.
>>
>> Is there performance problems with your patch without this chunk? I
>> may see another problem with yours, I need to think it through.
> 
> No, and in fact it probably should be a separate thing, but I kind of
> like your approach so not moving forward with mine. I do think it's
> worth looking into separately, as there's no reason why we can't wake a
> non-hashed worker if we're just doing hashed work from the existing
> thread. If that thread is just doing copies and not blocking, the
> unhashed (or next hashed) work is just sitting idle while it could be
> running instead.

Then, I'll clean the diff, hopefully soon. Could I steal parts of your patch
description?

> 
> Hence I added that hunk, to kick a new worker to proceed in parallel.

It seems, I need to take a closer look at this accounting in general.


-- 
Pavel Begunkov


[-- Attachment #2: OpenPGP digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 833 bytes --]

  reply index

Thread overview: 20+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2020-03-19 18:56 Jens Axboe
2020-03-22 16:09 ` Pavel Begunkov
2020-03-22 16:24   ` Pavel Begunkov
2020-03-22 17:08     ` Jens Axboe
2020-03-22 18:54     ` Pavel Begunkov
2020-03-22 19:51       ` Jens Axboe
2020-03-22 20:05         ` Jens Axboe
2020-03-22 20:15           ` Jens Axboe
2020-03-22 20:20             ` Pavel Begunkov
2020-03-22 21:16               ` Pavel Begunkov
2020-03-22 21:31                 ` Pavel Begunkov
2020-03-22 20:25         ` Pavel Begunkov
2020-03-23  1:37           ` Jens Axboe
2020-03-23  8:38             ` Pavel Begunkov [this message]
2020-03-23 14:26               ` Jens Axboe
2020-03-22 17:08   ` Jens Axboe
2020-03-22 17:37     ` Pavel Begunkov
2020-03-22 20:56 ` Pavel Begunkov
2020-03-23 19:57 Pavel Begunkov
2020-03-24  2:31 ` 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=d316093f-46cd-7ae0-714a-7b90f3df5f1e@gmail.com \
    --to=asml.silence@gmail.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

IO-Uring Archive on lore.kernel.org

Archives are clonable:
	git clone --mirror https://lore.kernel.org/io-uring/0 io-uring/git/0.git

	# If you have public-inbox 1.1+ installed, you may
	# initialize and index your mirror using the following commands:
	public-inbox-init -V2 io-uring io-uring/ https://lore.kernel.org/io-uring \
		io-uring@vger.kernel.org
	public-inbox-index io-uring

Example config snippet for mirrors

Newsgroup available over NNTP:
	nntp://nntp.lore.kernel.org/org.kernel.vger.io-uring


AGPL code for this site: git clone https://public-inbox.org/public-inbox.git