From: Jens Axboe <axboe@kernel.dk>
To: Christoph Hellwig <hch@infradead.org>,
"Darrick J. Wong" <djwong@kernel.org>
Cc: Miklos Szeredi <miklos@szeredi.hu>,
Bernd Schubert <bschubert@ddn.com>,
io-uring@vger.kernel.org, linux-ext4@vger.kernel.org,
linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, linux-xfs@vger.kernel.org,
dsingh@ddn.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] fs: add FMODE_DIO_PARALLEL_WRITE flag
Date: Tue, 18 Apr 2023 19:29:50 -0600 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <74244cb8-abf5-b559-5e9f-24d39c801855@kernel.dk> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <ZDuNqQgpHUw+gi9G@infradead.org>
On 4/15/23 11:54?PM, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> On Fri, Apr 14, 2023 at 08:36:12AM -0700, Darrick J. Wong wrote:
>> IIUC uring wants to avoid the situation where someone sends 300 writes
>> to the same file, all of which end up in background workers, and all of
>> which then contend on exclusive i_rwsem. Hence it has some hashing
>> scheme that executes io requests serially if they hash to the same value
>> (which iirc is the inode number?) to prevent resource waste.
>>
>> This flag turns off that hashing behavior on the assumption that each of
>> those 300 writes won't serialize on the other 299 writes, hence it's ok
>> to start up 300 workers.
>>
>> (apologies for precoffee garbled response)
>
> It might be useful if someone (Jens?) could clearly document the
> assumptions for this flag.
I guess it can be summed up as the common case should not be using
exclusive (per file/inode) locking. If file extensions need exclusive
locking that's less of a concern, as I don't think it's unreasonable to
expect that to require stricter locking.
--
Jens Axboe
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2023-04-19 1:29 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 20+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2023-03-07 17:20 [PATCHSET for-next 0/2] Flag file systems as supporting parallel dio writes Jens Axboe
2023-03-07 17:20 ` [PATCH 1/2] fs: add FMODE_DIO_PARALLEL_WRITE flag Jens Axboe
2023-04-12 13:40 ` Bernd Schubert
2023-04-12 13:43 ` Bernd Schubert
2023-04-13 7:40 ` Miklos Szeredi
2023-04-13 9:25 ` Bernd Schubert
2023-04-14 5:11 ` Christoph Hellwig
2023-04-14 15:36 ` Darrick J. Wong
2023-04-15 13:15 ` Jens Axboe
2023-04-18 12:42 ` Miklos Szeredi
2023-04-18 12:55 ` Bernd Schubert
2023-04-18 22:13 ` Dave Chinner
2023-04-19 1:28 ` Jens Axboe
2023-04-16 5:54 ` Christoph Hellwig
2023-04-19 1:29 ` Jens Axboe [this message]
2023-03-07 17:20 ` [PATCH 2/2] io_uring: avoid hashing O_DIRECT writes if the filesystem doesn't need it Jens Axboe
2023-03-15 17:40 ` [PATCHSET for-next 0/2] Flag file systems as supporting parallel dio writes Jens Axboe
2023-03-16 4:29 ` Darrick J. Wong
2023-03-17 2:53 ` Jens Axboe
2023-04-03 12:24 ` Christian Brauner
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=74244cb8-abf5-b559-5e9f-24d39c801855@kernel.dk \
--to=axboe@kernel.dk \
--cc=bschubert@ddn.com \
--cc=djwong@kernel.org \
--cc=dsingh@ddn.com \
--cc=hch@infradead.org \
--cc=io-uring@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-ext4@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-xfs@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=miklos@szeredi.hu \
/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).