All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de>
To: lkp@lists.01.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 6/6] fs: replace f_ops->get_poll_head with a static ->f_poll_head pointer
Date: Fri, 29 Jun 2018 15:28:48 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20180629132848.GA28510@lst.de> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CA+55aFxfkD9ozw77j-bshReLJN4dN2GEdW+R-LkxztceCW6OTg@mail.gmail.com>

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1439 bytes --]

On Thu, Jun 28, 2018 at 02:11:17PM -0700, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> Christoph, do you have a test program for IOCB_CMD_POLL and what it's
> actually supposed to do?

https://pagure.io/libaio/c/9c6935e81854d1585bbfa48c35b185849d746864?branch=aio-poll

is the actual test in libaio.  In addition to that the seastar library
actually has a real life user.  But given that is c++ with all modern
bells and whistles you'll probably have an as hard time as me actually
understanding that.

> Because I think that what it can do is simply to do the ->poll() calls
> outside the iocb locks, and then just attach the poll table to the
> kioctx afterwards.

We could do that on the submit side fairly easily.  The problem
is really the completion side, where I'd much avoid introducing a
spurious context switch.  Right now even with a NULL qproc we can't
guarantee any of that.  So we'll need to schedule out to a workqueue,
and then from that schedule the potential multiple NULL qproc calls,
which might actually block elsewhere even if __pollwait is never called.

> This whole "poll must not block" is a complete red herring. It doesn't
> come from any other requirements than BAD AIO GARBAGE CODE.

I comes from the fact to avoid a totally pointless context switch.
aio code itself works just fine called from a workqueue, we have
exatly that case when file system do non-trivial operations in their
end_io handler.

WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de>
To: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
Cc: Al Viro <viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk>, Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de>,
	linux-fsdevel <linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org>,
	Network Development <netdev@vger.kernel.org>, LKP <lkp@01.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 6/6] fs: replace f_ops->get_poll_head with a static ->f_poll_head pointer
Date: Fri, 29 Jun 2018 15:28:48 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20180629132848.GA28510@lst.de> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CA+55aFxfkD9ozw77j-bshReLJN4dN2GEdW+R-LkxztceCW6OTg@mail.gmail.com>

On Thu, Jun 28, 2018 at 02:11:17PM -0700, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> Christoph, do you have a test program for IOCB_CMD_POLL and what it's
> actually supposed to do?

https://pagure.io/libaio/c/9c6935e81854d1585bbfa48c35b185849d746864?branch=aio-poll

is the actual test in libaio.  In addition to that the seastar library
actually has a real life user.  But given that is c++ with all modern
bells and whistles you'll probably have an as hard time as me actually
understanding that.

> Because I think that what it can do is simply to do the ->poll() calls
> outside the iocb locks, and then just attach the poll table to the
> kioctx afterwards.

We could do that on the submit side fairly easily.  The problem
is really the completion side, where I'd much avoid introducing a
spurious context switch.  Right now even with a NULL qproc we can't
guarantee any of that.  So we'll need to schedule out to a workqueue,
and then from that schedule the potential multiple NULL qproc calls,
which might actually block elsewhere even if __pollwait is never called.

> This whole "poll must not block" is a complete red herring. It doesn't
> come from any other requirements than BAD AIO GARBAGE CODE.

I comes from the fact to avoid a totally pointless context switch.
aio code itself works just fine called from a workqueue, we have
exatly that case when file system do non-trivial operations in their
end_io handler.

  parent reply	other threads:[~2018-06-29 13:28 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 50+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2018-06-28 14:20 [RFC] replace ->get_poll_head with a waitqueue pointer in struct file Christoph Hellwig
2018-06-28 14:20 ` Christoph Hellwig
2018-06-28 14:20 ` [PATCH 1/6] net: remove sock_poll_busy_flag Christoph Hellwig
2018-06-28 14:20   ` Christoph Hellwig
2018-06-28 14:20 ` [PATCH 2/6] net: remove bogus RCU annotations on socket.wq Christoph Hellwig
2018-06-28 14:20   ` Christoph Hellwig
2018-06-28 14:20 ` [PATCH 3/6] net: don't detour through struct to find the poll head Christoph Hellwig
2018-06-28 14:20   ` Christoph Hellwig
2018-06-28 14:20 ` [PATCH 4/6] net: remove busy polling from sock_get_poll_head Christoph Hellwig
2018-06-28 14:20   ` Christoph Hellwig
2018-06-28 14:20 ` [PATCH 5/6] net: remove sock_poll_busy_loop Christoph Hellwig
2018-06-28 14:20   ` Christoph Hellwig
2018-06-28 14:20 ` [PATCH 6/6] fs: replace f_ops->get_poll_head with a static ->f_poll_head pointer Christoph Hellwig
2018-06-28 14:20   ` Christoph Hellwig
2018-06-28 16:40   ` Linus Torvalds
2018-06-28 16:40     ` Linus Torvalds
2018-06-28 18:17     ` Al Viro
2018-06-28 18:17       ` Al Viro
2018-06-28 19:31       ` Linus Torvalds
2018-06-28 19:31         ` Linus Torvalds
2018-06-28 20:28         ` Al Viro
2018-06-28 20:28           ` Al Viro
2018-06-28 20:37           ` Al Viro
2018-06-28 20:37             ` Al Viro
2018-06-28 21:16             ` Linus Torvalds
2018-06-28 21:16               ` Linus Torvalds
2018-06-28 21:11           ` Linus Torvalds
2018-06-28 21:11             ` Linus Torvalds
2018-06-28 21:30             ` Al Viro
2018-06-28 21:30               ` Al Viro
2018-06-28 21:39               ` Linus Torvalds
2018-06-28 21:39                 ` Linus Torvalds
2018-06-28 22:20               ` Al Viro
2018-06-28 22:20                 ` Al Viro
2018-06-28 22:35                 ` Linus Torvalds
2018-06-28 22:35                   ` Linus Torvalds
2018-06-28 22:49                   ` Al Viro
2018-06-28 22:49                     ` Al Viro
2018-06-28 22:55                     ` Linus Torvalds
2018-06-28 22:55                       ` Linus Torvalds
2018-06-28 23:37                       ` Al Viro
2018-06-28 23:37                         ` Al Viro
2018-06-29  0:13                         ` Linus Torvalds
2018-06-29  0:13                           ` Linus Torvalds
2018-06-29 13:29               ` Christoph Hellwig
2018-06-29 13:29                 ` Christoph Hellwig
2018-06-29 13:40                 ` Linus Torvalds
2018-06-29 13:40                   ` Linus Torvalds
2018-06-29 13:28             ` Christoph Hellwig [this message]
2018-06-29 13:28               ` Christoph Hellwig

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=20180629132848.GA28510@lst.de \
    --to=hch@lst.de \
    --cc=lkp@lists.01.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 an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.