Re: [PATCH 5.13 v2] io_uring: maintain drain requests' logic

Hao Xu
2021-04-09T07:06:22Z

在 2021/4/9 下午2:15, Hao Xu 写道:
> 在 2021/4/9 上午12:18, Jens Axboe 写道:
>> On 4/8/21 6:22 AM, Pavel Begunkov wrote:
>>> On 08/04/2021 12:43, Hao Xu wrote:
>>>> 在 2021/4/8 下午6:16, Hao Xu 写道:
>>>>> 在 2021/4/7 下午11:49, Jens Axboe 写道:
>>>>>> On 4/7/21 5:23 AM, Hao Xu wrote:
>>>>>>> more tests comming, send this out first for comments.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Hao Xu (3):
>>>>>>>     io_uring: add IOSQE_MULTI_CQES/REQ_F_MULTI_CQES for multishot
>>>>>>> requests
>>>>>>>     io_uring: maintain drain logic for multishot requests
>>>>>>>     io_uring: use REQ_F_MULTI_CQES for multipoll IORING_OP_ADD
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>    fs/io_uring.c                 | 34
>>>>>>> +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-----
>>>>>>>    include/uapi/linux/io_uring.h |  8 +++-----
>>>>>>>    2 files changed, 32 insertions(+), 10 deletions(-)
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Let's do the simple cq_extra first. I don't see a huge need to add an
>>>>>> IOSQE flag for this, probably best to just keep this on a per opcode
>>>>>> basis for now, which also then limits the code path to just touching
>>>>>> poll for now, as nothing else supports multishot CQEs at this point.
>>>>>>
>>>>> gotcha.
>>>>> a small issue here:
>>>>>    sqe-->sqe(link)-->sqe(link)-->sqe(link, multishot)-->sqe(drain)
>>>>>
>>>>> in the above case, assume the first 3 single-shot reqs have completed.
>>>>> then I think the drian request won't be issued now unless the
>>>>> multishot request in the linkchain has been issued. The trick is: a
>>>>> multishot req
>>>>> in a linkchain consumes cached_sq_head when io_get_sqe(), which
>>>>> means it
>>>>> is counted in seq, but we will deduct the sqe when it is issued if we
>>>>> want to do the job per opcode not in the main code path.
>>>>> before the multishot req issued:
>>>>>        all_sqes(4) - multishot_sqes(0) == all_cqes(3) -
>>>>> multishot_cqes(0)
>>>>> after the multishot req issued:
>>>>>        all_sqes(4) - multishot_sqes(1) == all_cqes(3) -
>>>>> multishot_cqes(0)
>>>>
>>>> Sorry, my statement is wrong. It's not "won't be issued now unless the
>>>> multishot request in the linkchain has been issued". Actually I now
>>>> think the drain req won't be issued unless the multishot request in the
>>>> linkchain has completed. Because we may first check req_need_defer()
>>>> then issue(req->link), so:
>>>>     sqe0-->sqe1(link)-->sqe2(link)-->sqe3(link,
>>>> multishot)-->sqe4(drain)
>>>>
>>>>    sqe2 is completed:
>>>>      call req_need_defer:
>>>>      all_sqes(4) - multishot_sqes(0) == all_cqes(3) - multishot_cqes(0)
>>>>    sqe3 is issued:
>>>>      all_sqes(4) - multishot_sqes(1) == all_cqes(3) - multishot_cqes(0)
>>>>    sqe3 is completed:
>>>>      call req_need_defer:
>>>>      all_sqes(4) - multishot_sqes(1) == all_cqes(3) - multishot_cqes(0)
>>>>
>>>> sqe4 shouldn't wait sqe3.
>>>
>>> Do you mean it wouldn't if the patch is applied? Because any drain
>>> request must wait for all requests submitted before to complete. And
>>> so before issuing sqe4 it must wait for sqe3 __request__ to die, and
>>> so for all sqe3's CQEs.
>>>
>>> previously
>>
>> I think we need to agree on what multishot means for dependencies. Does
>> it mean it just needs to trigger once? Or does it mean that it needs to
>> be totally finished. The latter may obviously never happen, depending on
>> the use case. Or it may be an expected condition because the caller will
>> cancel it at some point.
>>
>> The most logical view imho is that multishot changes nothing wrt drain.
>> If you ask for drain before something executes and you are using
>> multishot, then you need to understand that the multishot request needs
>> to fully complete before that condition is true and your dependency can
>> execute.
> This makes sense, and the implementation would be quite simpler. but we
> really need to document it somewhere so that users easily get to know
> that they cannot put a drain req after some multishot reqs if they don't
> want it to wait for them. Otherwise I worry about wrong use of it since
> the meaning of 'put a drain req after some multishot reqs' isn't so
> obvious:
>    - does it waits for those multishot reqs to complete once
>    - or does it waits for those ones to fully complete
>    - or does it ignore those ones at all
>
I realised that if a drain req has to wait for multishot reqs' fully
completion, then users have to explicitly cancel all the previous
multishot reqs, otherwise it won't execute forever:
sqe0(multishot)-->sqe1(drain)-->sqe2(cancel multishot) stuck
>
>
>>