Re: [ISSUE] The time cost of IOSQE_IO_LINK

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



On 2/17/20 10:46 AM, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> On Mon, Feb 17, 2020 at 09:16:34AM -0800, Jens Axboe wrote:
>> OK, did the conversion, and it turned out pretty trivial, and reduces my
>> lines as well since I don't have to manage the list side. See here:
>>
>> https://git.kernel.dk/cgit/linux-block/log/?h=io_uring-task-poll
>>
>> Three small prep patches:
>>
>> sched: move io-wq/workqueue worker sched in/out into helpers
>> kernel: abstract out task work helpers
>> sched: add a sched_work list
> 
> The __task_work_add() thing should loose the set_notify_resume() thing,
> that is very much task_work specific. Task_work, works off of
> TIF_NOTIFY_RESUME on return-to-user. We really don't want that set for
> the sched_work stuff.

Done, killed it from the generic helper.

I also made a tweak to work_exited, as I'll need that for the sched work.

> I've not looked too hard at the rest, I need to run to the Dojo, should
> have some time laster tonight, otherwise tomorrow ;-)

Enjoy! Thanks again for taking a look. I've pushed out the update:

https://git.kernel.dk/cgit/linux-block/log/?h=io_uring-task-poll


-- 
Jens Axboe




[Index of Archives]     [Linux Samsung SoC]     [Linux Rockchip SoC]     [Linux Actions SoC]     [Linux for Synopsys ARC Processors]     [Linux NFS]     [Linux NILFS]     [Linux USB Devel]     [Video for Linux]     [Linux Audio Users]     [Yosemite News]     [Linux Kernel]     [Linux SCSI]


  Powered by Linux