linux-fsdevel.vger.kernel.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
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


      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).