From: Jens Axboe <axboe@kernel.dk>
To: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
Cc: Pavel Begunkov <asml.silence@gmail.com>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>,
linux-block@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 0/2] Optimise io_uring completion waiting
Date: Tue, 24 Sep 2019 12:13:15 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <6f935fb9-6ebd-1df1-0cd0-69e34a16fa7e@kernel.dk> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20190924094942.GN2349@hirez.programming.kicks-ass.net>
On 9/24/19 3:49 AM, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> On Tue, Sep 24, 2019 at 10:36:28AM +0200, Jens Axboe wrote:
>
>> +struct io_wait_queue {
>> + struct wait_queue_entry wq;
>> + struct io_ring_ctx *ctx;
>> + struct task_struct *task;
>
> wq.private is where the normal waitqueue stores the task pointer.
>
> (I'm going to rename that)
If you do that, then we can just base the io_uring parts on that.
>> + unsigned to_wait;
>> + unsigned nr_timeouts;
>> +};
>> +
>> +static inline bool io_should_wake(struct io_wait_queue *iowq)
>> +{
>> + struct io_ring_ctx *ctx = iowq->ctx;
>> +
>> + /*
>> + * Wake up if we have enough events, or if a timeout occured since we
>> + * started waiting. For timeouts, we always want to return to userspace,
>> + * regardless of event count.
>> + */
>> + return io_cqring_events(ctx->rings) >= iowq->to_wait ||
>> + atomic_read(&ctx->cq_timeouts) != iowq->nr_timeouts;
>> +}
>> +
>> +static int io_wake_function(struct wait_queue_entry *curr, unsigned int mode,
>> + int wake_flags, void *key)
>> +{
>> + struct io_wait_queue *iowq = container_of(curr, struct io_wait_queue,
>> + wq);
>> +
>> + if (io_should_wake(iowq)) {
>> + list_del_init(&curr->entry);
>> + wake_up_process(iowq->task);
>
> Then you can use autoremove_wake_function() here.
>
>> + return 1;
>> + }
>> +
>> + return -1;
>> +}
>
> Ideally we'd get wait_event()'s @cond in a custom wake function. Then we
> can _always_ do this.
>
> This is one I'd love to have lambda functions for. It would actually
> work with GCC nested functions, because the wake function will always be
> in scope, but we can't use those in the kernel for other reasons :/
I'll be happy enough if I can just call autoremove_wake_function(), I
think that will simplify the case enough for io_uring to not really make
me care too much about going further. I'll leave that to you, if you
have the desire :-)
--
Jens Axboe
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2019-09-24 10:13 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 38+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2019-09-22 8:08 [PATCH v2 0/2] Optimise io_uring completion waiting Pavel Begunkov (Silence)
2019-09-22 8:08 ` [PATCH v2 1/2] sched/wait: Add wait_threshold Pavel Begunkov (Silence)
2019-09-23 7:19 ` Peter Zijlstra
2019-09-23 16:37 ` Pavel Begunkov
2019-09-23 19:27 ` Peter Zijlstra
2019-09-23 20:23 ` Peter Zijlstra
2019-09-24 6:44 ` Pavel Begunkov
2019-09-22 8:08 ` [PATCH v2 2/2] io_uring: Optimise cq waiting with wait_threshold Pavel Begunkov (Silence)
2019-09-22 15:51 ` [PATCH v2 0/2] Optimise io_uring completion waiting Jens Axboe
2019-09-23 8:35 ` Ingo Molnar
2019-09-23 16:21 ` Pavel Begunkov
2019-09-23 16:32 ` Pavel Begunkov
2019-09-23 20:48 ` Jens Axboe
2019-09-23 23:00 ` Jens Axboe
2019-09-24 7:06 ` Pavel Begunkov
2019-09-24 8:02 ` Jens Axboe
2019-09-24 8:27 ` Jens Axboe
2019-09-24 8:36 ` Jens Axboe
2019-09-24 9:33 ` Pavel Begunkov
2019-09-24 10:11 ` Jens Axboe
2019-09-24 9:49 ` Peter Zijlstra
2019-09-24 10:13 ` Jens Axboe [this message]
2019-09-24 10:34 ` Jens Axboe
2019-09-24 11:11 ` Pavel Begunkov
2019-09-24 11:15 ` Jens Axboe
2019-09-24 11:23 ` Pavel Begunkov
2019-09-24 13:13 ` Jens Axboe
2019-09-24 17:33 ` Pavel Begunkov
2019-09-24 17:46 ` Jens Axboe
2019-09-24 18:28 ` Pavel Begunkov
2019-09-24 19:32 ` Jens Axboe
2019-09-24 11:43 ` Peter Zijlstra
2019-09-24 12:57 ` Jens Axboe
2019-09-24 11:33 ` Peter Zijlstra
2019-09-24 9:20 ` Pavel Begunkov
2019-09-24 10:09 ` Jens Axboe
2019-09-24 9:21 ` Pavel Begunkov
2019-09-24 10:09 ` Jens Axboe
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=6f935fb9-6ebd-1df1-0cd0-69e34a16fa7e@kernel.dk \
--to=axboe@kernel.dk \
--cc=asml.silence@gmail.com \
--cc=linux-block@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mingo@kernel.org \
--cc=mingo@redhat.com \
--cc=peterz@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