Re: [PATCH for-next 0/7] cqe posting cleanups

Pavel Begunkov
2022-06-19T12:37:08Z

On 6/19/22 12:26, Pavel Begunkov wrote:
> Apart from this patches removing some implicit assumptions, which we
> had problems with before, and making code cleaner, they and especially
> 6-7 are also needed to push for synchronisation optimisations later, lile
> [1] or removing spinlocking with SINGLE_ISSUER.
>
> The downside is that we add additional lock/unlock into eventfd path,
> but I don't think we care about it.

just in case there conflicts, it's based on top of

"[PATCH for-next 0/4] simple cleanups" from yesterday

>
> The series also exposes a minor issue with cancellations, which for some
> reason calls io_kill_timeouts() and io_poll_remove_all() too many times on
> task exit. That makes poll-cancel to timeout on sigalarm, though usually
> is fine if given 3-5 sec instead of 1. We'll investigate it later.
>
> [1] https://github.com/isilence/linux/commit/6224f58bf7b542e6aed1eed44ee6bd5b5f706437
>
> Pavel Begunkov (7):
> io_uring: remove extra io_commit_cqring()
> io_uring: reshuffle io_uring/io_uring.h
> io_uring: move io_eventfd_signal()
> io_uring: hide eventfd assumptions in evenfd paths
> io_uring: remove ->flush_cqes optimisation
> io_uring: introduce locking helpers for CQE posting
> io_uring: add io_commit_cqring_flush()
>
> include/linux/io_uring_types.h | 2 +
> io_uring/io_uring.c | 144 ++++++++++++++++-----------------
> io_uring/io_uring.h | 108 ++++++++++++++-----------
> io_uring/rw.c | 5 +-
> io_uring/timeout.c | 7 +-
> 5 files changed, 133 insertions(+), 133 deletions(-)
>

--
Pavel Begunkov