From: <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
To: axboe@kernel.dk, andres@anarazel.de, oleksandr@natalenko.name,
phil@raspberrypi.com
Cc: <stable@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: FAILED: patch "[PATCH] io_uring: gate iowait schedule on having pending requests" failed to apply to 5.15-stable tree
Date: Tue, 01 Aug 2023 07:53:55 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <2023080154-handed-folic-f52f@gregkh> (raw)
The patch below does not apply to the 5.15-stable tree.
If someone wants it applied there, or to any other stable or longterm
tree, then please email the backport, including the original git commit
id to <stable@vger.kernel.org>.
To reproduce the conflict and resubmit, you may use the following commands:
git fetch https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/stable/linux.git/ linux-5.15.y
git checkout FETCH_HEAD
git cherry-pick -x 7b72d661f1f2f950ab8c12de7e2bc48bdac8ed69
# <resolve conflicts, build, test, etc.>
git commit -s
git send-email --to '<stable@vger.kernel.org>' --in-reply-to '2023080154-handed-folic-f52f@gregkh' --subject-prefix 'PATCH 5.15.y' HEAD^..
Possible dependencies:
7b72d661f1f2 ("io_uring: gate iowait schedule on having pending requests")
8a796565cec3 ("io_uring: Use io_schedule* in cqring wait")
d33a39e57768 ("io_uring: keep timeout in io_wait_queue")
46ae7eef44f6 ("io_uring: optimise non-timeout waiting")
846072f16eed ("io_uring: mimimise io_cqring_wait_schedule")
3fcf19d592d5 ("io_uring: parse check_cq out of wq waiting")
12521a5d5cb7 ("io_uring: fix CQ waiting timeout handling")
52ea806ad983 ("io_uring: finish waiting before flushing overflow entries")
35d90f95cfa7 ("io_uring: include task_work run after scheduling in wait for events")
1b346e4aa8e7 ("io_uring: don't check overflow flush failures")
a85381d8326d ("io_uring: skip overflow CQE posting for dying ring")
c0e0d6ba25f1 ("io_uring: add IORING_SETUP_DEFER_TASKRUN")
b4c98d59a787 ("io_uring: introduce io_has_work")
78a861b94959 ("io_uring: add sync cancelation API through io_uring_register()")
c34398a8c018 ("io_uring: remove __io_req_task_work_add")
ed5ccb3beeba ("io_uring: remove priority tw list optimisation")
4a0fef62788b ("io_uring: optimize io_uring_task layout")
253993210bd8 ("io_uring: introduce locking helpers for CQE posting")
305bef988708 ("io_uring: hide eventfd assumptions in eventfd paths")
affa87db9010 ("io_uring: fix multi ctx cancellation")
thanks,
greg k-h
------------------ original commit in Linus's tree ------------------
From 7b72d661f1f2f950ab8c12de7e2bc48bdac8ed69 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Jens Axboe <axboe@kernel.dk>
Date: Mon, 24 Jul 2023 11:28:17 -0600
Subject: [PATCH] io_uring: gate iowait schedule on having pending requests
A previous commit made all cqring waits marked as iowait, as a way to
improve performance for short schedules with pending IO. However, for
use cases that have a special reaper thread that does nothing but
wait on events on the ring, this causes a cosmetic issue where we
know have one core marked as being "busy" with 100% iowait.
While this isn't a grave issue, it is confusing to users. Rather than
always mark us as being in iowait, gate setting of current->in_iowait
to 1 by whether or not the waiting task has pending requests.
Cc: stable@vger.kernel.org
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/io-uring/CAMEGJJ2RxopfNQ7GNLhr7X9=bHXKo+G5OOe0LUq=+UgLXsv1Xg@mail.gmail.com/
Link: https://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=217699
Link: https://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=217700
Reported-by: Oleksandr Natalenko <oleksandr@natalenko.name>
Reported-by: Phil Elwell <phil@raspberrypi.com>
Tested-by: Andres Freund <andres@anarazel.de>
Fixes: 8a796565cec3 ("io_uring: Use io_schedule* in cqring wait")
Signed-off-by: Jens Axboe <axboe@kernel.dk>
diff --git a/io_uring/io_uring.c b/io_uring/io_uring.c
index 89a611541bc4..f4591b912ea8 100644
--- a/io_uring/io_uring.c
+++ b/io_uring/io_uring.c
@@ -2493,11 +2493,20 @@ int io_run_task_work_sig(struct io_ring_ctx *ctx)
return 0;
}
+static bool current_pending_io(void)
+{
+ struct io_uring_task *tctx = current->io_uring;
+
+ if (!tctx)
+ return false;
+ return percpu_counter_read_positive(&tctx->inflight);
+}
+
/* when returns >0, the caller should retry */
static inline int io_cqring_wait_schedule(struct io_ring_ctx *ctx,
struct io_wait_queue *iowq)
{
- int token, ret;
+ int io_wait, ret;
if (unlikely(READ_ONCE(ctx->check_cq)))
return 1;
@@ -2511,17 +2520,19 @@ static inline int io_cqring_wait_schedule(struct io_ring_ctx *ctx,
return 0;
/*
- * Use io_schedule_prepare/finish, so cpufreq can take into account
- * that the task is waiting for IO - turns out to be important for low
- * QD IO.
+ * Mark us as being in io_wait if we have pending requests, so cpufreq
+ * can take into account that the task is waiting for IO - turns out
+ * to be important for low QD IO.
*/
- token = io_schedule_prepare();
+ io_wait = current->in_iowait;
+ if (current_pending_io())
+ current->in_iowait = 1;
ret = 0;
if (iowq->timeout == KTIME_MAX)
schedule();
else if (!schedule_hrtimeout(&iowq->timeout, HRTIMER_MODE_ABS))
ret = -ETIME;
- io_schedule_finish(token);
+ current->in_iowait = io_wait;
return ret;
}
next reply other threads:[~2023-08-01 5:54 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 2+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2023-08-01 5:53 gregkh [this message]
2023-08-01 14:40 ` FAILED: patch "[PATCH] io_uring: gate iowait schedule on having pending requests" failed to apply to 5.15-stable tree 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=2023080154-handed-folic-f52f@gregkh \
--to=gregkh@linuxfoundation.org \
--cc=andres@anarazel.de \
--cc=axboe@kernel.dk \
--cc=oleksandr@natalenko.name \
--cc=phil@raspberrypi.com \
--cc=stable@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).