From: Pavel Begunkov <asml.silence@gmail.com>
To: "Ritesh Harjani (IBM)" <ritesh.list@gmail.com>,
Matthew Wilcox <willy@infradead.org>
Cc: "Darrick J. Wong" <djwong@kernel.org>,
Fengnan Chang <changfengnan@bytedance.com>,
brauner@kernel.org, linux-xfs@vger.kernel.org,
linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, Jens Axboe <axboe@kernel.dk>,
linux-block@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] iomap: allow iomap using the per-cpu bio cache
Date: Wed, 3 Sep 2025 10:53:49 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <c4bc7c33-b1e1-47d1-9d22-b189c86c6c7d@gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <874ityad1d.fsf@gmail.com>
On 8/23/25 05:15, Ritesh Harjani (IBM) wrote:
> Matthew Wilcox <willy@infradead.org> writes:
>
>> On Fri, Aug 22, 2025 at 09:37:32PM +0530, Ritesh Harjani wrote:
>>> Matthew Wilcox <willy@infradead.org> writes:
>>>> On Fri, Aug 22, 2025 at 08:05:50AM -0700, Darrick J. Wong wrote:
>>>>> Is there a reason /not/ to use the per-cpu bio cache unconditionally?
>>>>
>>>> AIUI it's not safe because completions might happen on a different CPU
>>>> from the submission.
>>>
>>> At max the bio de-queued from cpu X can be returned to cpu Y cache, this
>>> shouldn't be unsafe right? e.g. bio_put_percpu_cache().
>>> Not optimal for performance though.
>>>
>>> Also even for io-uring the IRQ completions (non-polling requests) can
>>> get routed to a different cpu then the submitting cpu, correct?
>>> Then the completions (bio completion processing) are handled via IPIs on
>>> the submtting cpu or based on the cache topology, right?
>>>
>>>> At least, there's nowhere that sets REQ_ALLOC_CACHE unconditionally.
>>>>
>>>> This could do with some better documentation ..
>>>
>>> Agreed. Looking at the history this got added for polling mode first but
>>> later got enabled for even irq driven io-uring rw requests [1]. So it
>>> make sense to understand if this can be added unconditionally for DIO
>>> requests or not.
>>
>> So why does the flag now exist at all? Why not use the cache
>> unconditionally?
>
> I am hoping the author of this patch or folks with io-uring expertise
> (which added the per-cpu bio cache in the first place) could answer
> this better. i.e.
CC'ing would help :)
> Now that per-cpu bio cache is being used by io-uring rw requests for
> both polled and non-polled I/O. Does that mean, we can kill
> IOCB_ALLOC_CACHE check from iomap dio path completely and use per-cpu
> bio cache unconditionally by passing REQ_ALLOC_CACHE flag? That means
> all DIO requests via iomap can now use this per-cpu bio cache and not
> just the one initiated via io-uring path.
>
> Or are there still restrictions in using this per-cpu bio cache, which
> limits it to be only used via io-uring path? If yes, what are they? And
> can this be documented somewhere?
It should be safe to use for task context allocations (struct
bio_alloc_cache::free_list is [soft]irq unsafe)
IOCB_ALLOC_CACHE shouldn't be needed, but IIRC I played it
conservatively to not impact paths I didn't specifically benchmark.
FWIW, I couldn't measure any negative impact with io_uring at the
time for requests completed on a different CPU (same NUMA), but if
it's a problem, to offset the effect we can probably add a CPU
check => bio_free and/or try batch de-allocate when the cache is
full.
--
Pavel Begunkov
prev parent reply other threads:[~2025-09-03 9:52 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 17+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2025-08-22 8:26 [PATCH] iomap: allow iomap using the per-cpu bio cache Fengnan Chang
2025-08-22 15:05 ` Darrick J. Wong
2025-08-22 15:42 ` Matthew Wilcox
2025-08-22 16:07 ` Ritesh Harjani
2025-08-22 16:51 ` Matthew Wilcox
2025-08-23 4:15 ` Ritesh Harjani
2025-08-25 8:51 ` Fengnan Chang
2025-08-25 9:21 ` Christoph Hellwig
2025-08-25 9:41 ` Fengnan Chang
2025-08-25 10:47 ` Christoph Hellwig
2025-08-26 9:46 ` Fengnan Chang
2025-08-26 13:15 ` Christoph Hellwig
2025-08-26 16:53 ` Ritesh Harjani
2025-08-29 4:26 ` [External] " Fengnan Chang
2025-09-03 8:28 ` Fengnan Chang
2025-09-06 4:25 ` Ritesh Harjani
2025-09-03 9:53 ` Pavel Begunkov [this message]
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=c4bc7c33-b1e1-47d1-9d22-b189c86c6c7d@gmail.com \
--to=asml.silence@gmail.com \
--cc=axboe@kernel.dk \
--cc=brauner@kernel.org \
--cc=changfengnan@bytedance.com \
--cc=djwong@kernel.org \
--cc=linux-block@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-xfs@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=ritesh.list@gmail.com \
--cc=willy@infradead.org \
/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).