From: "Alexei Starovoitov" <alexei.starovoitov@gmail.com>
To: "Tao Cui" <cui.tao@linux.dev>, <tj@kernel.org>,
<josef@toxicopanda.com>, <axboe@kernel.dk>, <ameryhung@gmail.com>
Cc: <cgroups@vger.kernel.org>, <linux-block@vger.kernel.org>,
<linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>, <bpf@vger.kernel.org>,
<andrii@kernel.org>, <eddyz87@gmail.com>, <daniel@iogearbox.net>,
<linux-kselftest@vger.kernel.org>, <cuitao@kylinos.cn>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH v5 1/5] blk-iocost: add BPF struct_ops cost model support
Date: Fri, 18 Sep 2026 15:43:50 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <DLIK37JYD35X.3NZ4ZHTHDKAFX@gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20260918031751.1255420-2-cui.tao@linux.dev>
On Fri, Sep 18, 2026 at 11:17 AM Tao Cui <cui.tao@linux.dev> wrote:
> The registration and binding model follows the TCP congestion
> model registration pattern: registering a struct_ops makes the model
> available by its name (char name[IOCOST_MODEL_NAME_LEN], validated at
> init_member), while
> io.cost.model binds one registered model to a device with
> "model=<name>" and unbinds with "model=linear" or "ctrl=auto/user".
> Unregistering a model removes it from the registry, but its name
I don't think it's what Tejun asked for in v1. He asked for a per-device
struct_ops instance where attaching switches the device to bpf and
detaching switches it back. Instead there is a global name registry,
a lifecycle list, an "unregistered but still bound" state and a
refcount_t on top of bpf_struct_ops_get(), and every version since v3
had a lifetime bug in exactly that code.
Do it like hid_bpf_ops does with hid_id: device in the struct_ops,
bind in .reg, unbind in .unreg, and le
t struct_ops own the lifetime.
pls wait for Tejun's feedback before respinning.
pw-bot: cr
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2026-09-18 15:43 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 10+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2026-09-18 3:17 [RFC PATCH v5 0/5] blk-iocost: BPF struct_ops cost model Tao Cui
2026-09-18 3:17 ` [RFC PATCH v5 1/5] blk-iocost: add BPF struct_ops cost model support Tao Cui
2026-09-18 3:29 ` sashiko-bot
2026-09-18 15:43 ` Alexei Starovoitov [this message]
2026-09-19 7:34 ` Tao Cui
2026-09-18 3:17 ` [RFC PATCH v5 2/5] selftests/bpf: add iocost cost model test Tao Cui
2026-09-18 3:17 ` [RFC PATCH v5 3/5] blk-iocost: add iocost_ioc_tick tracepoint for per-period device summary Tao Cui
2026-09-18 3:17 ` [RFC PATCH v5 4/5] selftests/bpf: add multi-stream sequentiality example model Tao Cui
2026-09-18 3:17 ` [RFC PATCH v5 5/5] docs: cgroup-v2: document io.cost model=<name> binding Tao Cui
2026-09-18 5:48 ` [RFC PATCH v5 0/5] blk-iocost: BPF struct_ops cost model Tao Cui
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=DLIK37JYD35X.3NZ4ZHTHDKAFX@gmail.com \
--to=alexei.starovoitov@gmail.com \
--cc=ameryhung@gmail.com \
--cc=andrii@kernel.org \
--cc=axboe@kernel.dk \
--cc=bpf@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=cgroups@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=cui.tao@linux.dev \
--cc=cuitao@kylinos.cn \
--cc=daniel@iogearbox.net \
--cc=eddyz87@gmail.com \
--cc=josef@toxicopanda.com \
--cc=linux-block@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kselftest@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=tj@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.