From: Christian Brauner <brauner@kernel.org>
To: Max Kellermann <max.kellermann@ionos.com>, Jens Axboe <axboe@kernel.dk>
Cc: Alexander Viro <viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk>,
linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] fs/splice: don't block splice_direct_to_actor() after data was read
Date: Tue, 26 Sep 2023 14:26:12 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20230926-planlos-decken-09929871d43a@brauner> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAKPOu+9VYJeZbc6xLJzJY=mtmDm+Of9DEKk0kQwnn0nvVzN_4A@mail.gmail.com>
On Tue, Sep 26, 2023 at 12:41:42PM +0200, Max Kellermann wrote:
> On Tue, Sep 26, 2023 at 12:21 PM Christian Brauner <brauner@kernel.org> wrote:
> > Hm, so the thing that is worrysome about this change is that this may
> > cause regressions afaict as this is a pretty significant change from
> > current behavior.
>
> Would you prefer a new flag for explicitly selecting "wait until at
> least one byte was transferred, but don't wait further"? Because many
I had thought about it but afaict it'd be rather annoying as one can get
into that code from copy_file_range() as well so we'd need a new flag
for that system call as well afaict.
> applications need this behavior, and some (like nginx) have already
> worked around the problem by limiting the maximum transaction size,
> which I consider a bad workaround, because it leads to unnecessary
> system calls and still doesn't really solve the latency problem.
>
> On the other hand, what exactly would the absence of this flag mean...
> the old behavior, without my patch, can lead to partial transfers, and
> the absence of the flag doesn't mean it can't happen; my patch tackles
> just one corner case, but one that is important for me.
>
> We have been running this patch in production for nearly a year (and
> will continue to do so until upstream kernels have a proper solution)
> and never observed a problem, and I consider it safe, but I
> acknowledge the risk that this may reveal obscure application bugs if
> applied globally to all Linux kernels, so I understand your worries.
I think hanging for an insane amount of time is indeed a problem and
tweaking the code in this way might actually be useful but we'd need to
let this soak for quite a while to see whether this causes any issues.
@Jens, what do you think? Is this worth it?
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2023-09-26 12:26 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 10+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2023-09-19 8:12 [PATCH] fs/splice: don't block splice_direct_to_actor() after data was read Max Kellermann
2023-09-19 14:18 ` Christian Brauner
2023-09-20 17:28 ` Jens Axboe
2023-09-20 18:16 ` Max Kellermann
2023-09-25 13:10 ` Christian Brauner
2023-09-26 6:36 ` [PATCH v2] " Max Kellermann
2023-09-26 10:21 ` Christian Brauner
2023-09-26 10:41 ` Max Kellermann
2023-09-26 12:26 ` Christian Brauner [this message]
2023-09-26 6:39 ` [PATCH] " Max Kellermann
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=20230926-planlos-decken-09929871d43a@brauner \
--to=brauner@kernel.org \
--cc=axboe@kernel.dk \
--cc=linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=max.kellermann@ionos.com \
--cc=viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk \
/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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).