From: Christian Brauner <brauner@kernel.org>
To: Max Kellermann <max.kellermann@ionos.com>, Jens Axboe <axboe@kernel.dk>
Cc: Alexander Viro <viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk>,
linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] fs/splice: don't block splice_direct_to_actor() after data was read
Date: Tue, 26 Sep 2023 14:26:12 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20230926-planlos-decken-09929871d43a@brauner> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAKPOu+9VYJeZbc6xLJzJY=mtmDm+Of9DEKk0kQwnn0nvVzN_4A@mail.gmail.com>
On Tue, Sep 26, 2023 at 12:41:42PM +0200, Max Kellermann wrote:
> On Tue, Sep 26, 2023 at 12:21 PM Christian Brauner <brauner@kernel.org> wrote:
> > Hm, so the thing that is worrysome about this change is that this may
> > cause regressions afaict as this is a pretty significant change from
> > current behavior.
>
> Would you prefer a new flag for explicitly selecting "wait until at
> least one byte was transferred, but don't wait further"? Because many
I had thought about it but afaict it'd be rather annoying as one can get
into that code from copy_file_range() as well so we'd need a new flag
for that system call as well afaict.
> applications need this behavior, and some (like nginx) have already
> worked around the problem by limiting the maximum transaction size,
> which I consider a bad workaround, because it leads to unnecessary
> system calls and still doesn't really solve the latency problem.
>
> On the other hand, what exactly would the absence of this flag mean...
> the old behavior, without my patch, can lead to partial transfers, and
> the absence of the flag doesn't mean it can't happen; my patch tackles
> just one corner case, but one that is important for me.
>
> We have been running this patch in production for nearly a year (and
> will continue to do so until upstream kernels have a proper solution)
> and never observed a problem, and I consider it safe, but I
> acknowledge the risk that this may reveal obscure application bugs if
> applied globally to all Linux kernels, so I understand your worries.
I think hanging for an insane amount of time is indeed a problem and
tweaking the code in this way might actually be useful but we'd need to
let this soak for quite a while to see whether this causes any issues.
@Jens, what do you think? Is this worth it?
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2023-09-26 12:26 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 10+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2023-09-19 8:12 [PATCH] fs/splice: don't block splice_direct_to_actor() after data was read Max Kellermann
2023-09-19 14:18 ` Christian Brauner
2023-09-20 17:28 ` Jens Axboe
2023-09-20 18:16 ` Max Kellermann
2023-09-25 13:10 ` Christian Brauner
2023-09-26 6:36 ` [PATCH v2] " Max Kellermann
2023-09-26 10:21 ` Christian Brauner
2023-09-26 10:41 ` Max Kellermann
2023-09-26 12:26 ` Christian Brauner [this message]
2023-09-26 6:39 ` [PATCH] " Max Kellermann
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=20230926-planlos-decken-09929871d43a@brauner \
--to=brauner@kernel.org \
--cc=axboe@kernel.dk \
--cc=linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=max.kellermann@ionos.com \
--cc=viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk \
/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.