All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Gabriel Krisman Bertazi <krisman@suse.de>
To: Breno Leitao <leitao@debian.org>
Cc: axboe@kernel.dk, asml.silence@gmail.com,
	io-uring@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
	gustavold@meta.com, leit@meta.com, kasan-dev@googlegroups.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 1/2] io_uring: Move from hlist to io_wq_work_node
Date: Thu, 23 Feb 2023 16:02:25 -0300	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <87wn48ryri.fsf@suse.de> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20230223164353.2839177-2-leitao@debian.org> (Breno Leitao's message of "Thu, 23 Feb 2023 08:43:52 -0800")

Breno Leitao <leitao@debian.org> writes:

> Having cache entries linked using the hlist format brings no benefit, and
> also requires an unnecessary extra pointer address per cache entry.
>
> Use the internal io_wq_work_node single-linked list for the internal
> alloc caches (async_msghdr and async_poll)
>
> This is required to be able to use KASAN on cache entries, since we do
> not need to touch unused (and poisoned) cache entries when adding more
> entries to the list.
>

Looking at this patch, I wonder if it could go in the opposite direction
instead, and drop io_wq_work_node entirely in favor of list_head. :)

Do we gain anything other than avoiding the backpointer with a custom
linked implementation, instead of using the interface available in
list.h, that developers know how to use and has other features like
poisoning and extra debug checks?


>  static inline struct io_cache_entry *io_alloc_cache_get(struct io_alloc_cache *cache)
>  {
> -	if (!hlist_empty(&cache->list)) {
> -		struct hlist_node *node = cache->list.first;
> +	if (cache->list.next) {
> +		struct io_cache_entry *entry;
>  
> -		hlist_del(node);
> -		return container_of(node, struct io_cache_entry, node);
> +		entry = container_of(cache->list.next, struct io_cache_entry, node);
> +		cache->list.next = cache->list.next->next;
> +		return entry;
>  	}

From a quick look, I think you could use wq_stack_extract() here

-- 
Gabriel Krisman Bertazi

  reply	other threads:[~2023-02-23 19:02 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 10+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2023-02-23 16:43 [PATCH v3 0/2] io_uring: Add KASAN support for alloc caches Breno Leitao
2023-02-23 16:43 ` [PATCH v3 1/2] io_uring: Move from hlist to io_wq_work_node Breno Leitao
2023-02-23 19:02   ` Gabriel Krisman Bertazi [this message]
2023-02-23 19:39     ` Jens Axboe
2023-02-24 18:32       ` Gabriel Krisman Bertazi
2023-02-24 19:41         ` Jens Axboe
2023-02-24  9:55     ` Breno Leitao
2023-02-23 16:43 ` [PATCH v3 2/2] io_uring: Add KASAN support for alloc_caches Breno Leitao
2023-02-23 19:09   ` Gabriel Krisman Bertazi
2023-03-16 19:01 ` [PATCH v3 0/2] io_uring: Add KASAN support for alloc caches 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=87wn48ryri.fsf@suse.de \
    --to=krisman@suse.de \
    --cc=asml.silence@gmail.com \
    --cc=axboe@kernel.dk \
    --cc=gustavold@meta.com \
    --cc=io-uring@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=kasan-dev@googlegroups.com \
    --cc=leit@meta.com \
    --cc=leitao@debian.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@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 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.