Re: [PATCH v4] Use io_uring_register_ring_fd() to skip fd operations

["Daniel P. Berrangé" <berrange@redhat.com>]

On Fri, Apr 22, 2022 at 11:00:47AM +0100, Fam Zheng wrote:
> On 2022-04-22 09:52, Daniel P. Berrangé wrote:
> > On Fri, Apr 22, 2022 at 09:34:28AM +0100, Fam Zheng wrote:
> > > On 2022-04-22 00:36, Sam Li wrote:
> > > > Linux recently added a new io_uring(7) optimization API that QEMU
> > > > doesn't take advantage of yet. The liburing library that QEMU uses
> > > > has added a corresponding new API calling io_uring_register_ring_fd().
> > > > When this API is called after creating the ring, the io_uring_submit()
> > > > library function passes a flag to the io_uring_enter(2) syscall
> > > > allowing it to skip the ring file descriptor fdget()/fdput()
> > > > operations. This saves some CPU cycles.
> > > > 
> > > > Signed-off-by: Sam Li <faithilikerun@gmail.com>
> > > > ---
> > > >  block/io_uring.c | 10 +++++++++-
> > > >  1 file changed, 9 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
> > > > 
> > > > diff --git a/block/io_uring.c b/block/io_uring.c
> > > > index 782afdb433..5247fb79e2 100644
> > > > --- a/block/io_uring.c
> > > > +++ b/block/io_uring.c
> > > > @@ -435,8 +435,16 @@ LuringState *luring_init(Error **errp)
> > > >      }
> > > >  
> > > >      ioq_init(&s->io_q);
> > > > -    return s;
> > > > +    if (io_uring_register_ring_fd(&s->ring) < 0) {
> > > > +        /*
> > > > +         * Only warn about this error: we will fallback to the non-optimized
> > > > +         * io_uring operations.
> > > > +         */
> > > > +        error_reportf_err(*errp,
> > > > +                         "failed to register linux io_uring ring file descriptor");
> > > 
> > > IIUC errp can be NULL, so let's not dereference it without checking. So, just
> > > use error_report?
> > 
> > Plenty of people will be running kernels that lack the new feature,
> > so this "failure" will be an expected scenario. We shouldn't be
> > spamming the logs with any error or warning message. Assuming  QEMU
> > remains fully functional, merely not as optimized, we should be
> > totally silent.
> 
> Functionally, that's a very valid point. But performance wise, is it good to
> have some visibility of this? Since people use io_uring instead of other
> options almost certainly for performance, and here the issue does matter quite
> a bit.

IMHO what you describe is largely a documentation issue, and/or something
for OS vendors to worry about if they want to maximise their users'
performance. As long as io_uring is fully functional we shouldn't print
errors on every QEMU startup, as it leads to pointless bug reports/support
escalations about something that is operating normally, wasting users and
vendors' time.

With regards,
Daniel
-- 
|: https://berrange.com      -o-    https://www.flickr.com/photos/dberrange :|
|: https://libvirt.org         -o-            https://fstop138.berrange.com :|
|: https://entangle-photo.org    -o-    https://www.instagram.com/dberrange :|