From: Pavel Begunkov <asml.silence@gmail.com>
To: Hao Xu <haoxu@linux.alibaba.com>, Jens Axboe <axboe@kernel.dk>
Cc: io-uring@vger.kernel.org, Joseph Qi <joseph.qi@linux.alibaba.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 5/5] io_uring: batch completion in prior_task_list
Date: Tue, 7 Dec 2021 21:16:43 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <4612f227-e313-b84a-40c7-8ff7320b830a@gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <fc9a8ac2-f339-a5c4-a85d-19d8c324a311@gmail.com>
On 12/7/21 21:01, Pavel Begunkov wrote:
> On 12/7/21 09:39, Hao Xu wrote:
>> In previous patches, we have already gathered some tw with
>> io_req_task_complete() as callback in prior_task_list, let's complete
>> them in batch while we cannot grab uring lock. In this way, we batch
>> the req_complete_post path.
[...]
>> + if (likely(*uring_locked))
>> + req->io_task_work.func(req, uring_locked);
>> + else
>> + __io_req_complete_post(req, req->result, io_put_kbuf(req));
>
> I think there is the same issue as last time, first iteration of tctx_task_work()
> sets ctx but doesn't get uring_lock. Then you go here, find a request with the
> same ctx and end up here with locking.
Maybe something like below on top? Totally untested. We basically always
want *uring_locked != *compl_locked, so we don't even need to to store
both vars.
diff --git a/fs/io_uring.c b/fs/io_uring.c
index f224f8df77a1..dfa226bf2c53 100644
--- a/fs/io_uring.c
+++ b/fs/io_uring.c
@@ -2233,27 +2233,28 @@ static inline void ctx_commit_and_unlock(struct io_ring_ctx *ctx)
}
static void handle_prior_tw_list(struct io_wq_work_node *node, struct io_ring_ctx **ctx,
- bool *uring_locked, bool *compl_locked)
+ bool *uring_locked)
{
+ if (*ctx && !*uring_locked)
+ spin_lock(&(*ctx)->completion_lock);
+
do {
struct io_wq_work_node *next = node->next;
struct io_kiocb *req = container_of(node, struct io_kiocb,
io_task_work.node);
if (req->ctx != *ctx) {
- if (unlikely(*compl_locked)) {
+ if (unlikely(!*uring_locked && *ctx))
ctx_commit_and_unlock(*ctx);
- *compl_locked = false;
- }
+
ctx_flush_and_put(*ctx, uring_locked);
*ctx = req->ctx;
/* if not contended, grab and improve batching */
*uring_locked = mutex_trylock(&(*ctx)->uring_lock);
- percpu_ref_get(&(*ctx)->refs);
- if (unlikely(!*uring_locked)) {
+ if (unlikely(!*uring_locked))
spin_lock(&(*ctx)->completion_lock);
- *compl_locked = true;
- }
+
+ percpu_ref_get(&(*ctx)->refs);
}
if (likely(*uring_locked))
req->io_task_work.func(req, uring_locked);
@@ -2262,10 +2263,8 @@ static void handle_prior_tw_list(struct io_wq_work_node *node, struct io_ring_ct
node = next;
} while (node);
- if (unlikely(*compl_locked)) {
+ if (unlikely(!*uring_locked))
ctx_commit_and_unlock(*ctx);
- *compl_locked = false;
- }
}
static void handle_tw_list(struct io_wq_work_node *node, struct io_ring_ctx **ctx, bool *locked)
@@ -2289,7 +2288,7 @@ static void handle_tw_list(struct io_wq_work_node *node, struct io_ring_ctx **ct
static void tctx_task_work(struct callback_head *cb)
{
- bool uring_locked = false, compl_locked = false;
+ bool uring_locked = false;
struct io_ring_ctx *ctx = NULL;
struct io_uring_task *tctx = container_of(cb, struct io_uring_task,
task_work);
@@ -2313,7 +2312,7 @@ static void tctx_task_work(struct callback_head *cb)
break;
if (node1)
- handle_prior_tw_list(node1, &ctx, &uring_locked, &compl_locked);
+ handle_prior_tw_list(node1, &ctx, &uring_locked);
if (node2)
handle_tw_list(node2, &ctx, &uring_locked);
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2021-12-07 21:16 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 14+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2021-12-07 9:39 [PATCH v7 0/5] task optimization Hao Xu
2021-12-07 9:39 ` [PATCH 1/5] io-wq: add helper to merge two wq_lists Hao Xu
2021-12-07 9:39 ` [PATCH 2/5] io_uring: add a priority tw list for irq completion work Hao Xu
2021-12-07 9:39 ` [PATCH 3/5] io_uring: add helper for task work execution code Hao Xu
2021-12-07 9:39 ` [PATCH 4/5] io_uring: split io_req_complete_post() and add a helper Hao Xu
2021-12-07 9:39 ` [PATCH 5/5] io_uring: batch completion in prior_task_list Hao Xu
2021-12-07 21:01 ` Pavel Begunkov
2021-12-07 21:16 ` Pavel Begunkov [this message]
2021-12-08 5:04 ` Hao Xu
2021-12-08 5:08 ` Hao Xu
2021-12-07 21:59 ` Jens Axboe
2021-12-08 5:23 ` Hao Xu
2021-12-07 11:18 ` [PATCH v7 0/5] task optimization Hao Xu
2021-12-07 16:48 ` 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=4612f227-e313-b84a-40c7-8ff7320b830a@gmail.com \
--to=asml.silence@gmail.com \
--cc=axboe@kernel.dk \
--cc=haoxu@linux.alibaba.com \
--cc=io-uring@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=joseph.qi@linux.alibaba.com \
/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.