Re: [PATCH 1/3] io_uring: don't use req->work.creds for inline requests

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

 



hi Pavel,

On 26/05/2020 17:59, Xiaoguang Wang wrote:
hi,

On 26/05/2020 09:43, Xiaoguang Wang wrote:
In io_init_req(), if uers requires a new credentials, currently we'll
save it in req->work.creds, but indeed io_wq_work is designed to describe
needed running environment for requests that will go to io-wq, if one
request is going to be submitted inline, we'd better not touch io_wq_work.
Here add a new 'const struct cred *creds' in io_kiocb, if uers requires a
new credentials, inline requests can use it.

This patch is also a preparation for later patch.

What's the difference from keeping only one creds field in io_kiocb (i.e.
req->work.creds), but handling it specially (i.e. always initialising)? It will
be a lot easier than tossing it around.

Also, the patch doubles {get,put}_creds() for sqe->personality case, and that's
extra atomics without a good reason.
You're right, thanks.
The original motivation for this patch is that it's just a preparation later patch
"io_uring: avoid whole io_wq_work copy for inline requests", I can use
io_wq_work.func
to determine whether to drop io_wq_work in io_req_work_drop_env(), so if
io_wq_work.func
is NULL, I don't want io_wq_work has a valid creds.
I'll look into whether we can just assign req->creds's pointer to
io_wq_work.creds to
reduce the atomic operations.

See a comment for the [2/3], can spark some ideas.

It's a bit messy and makes it more difficult to keep in mind -- all that extra
state (i.e. initialised or not) + caring whether func was already set. IMHO, the
nop-test do not really justifies extra complexity, unless the whole stuff is
pretty and clear. Can you benchmark something more realistic? at least
reads/writes to null_blk (completion_nsec=0).
Indeed for this patch set, I also don't expect any obvious performance improvement,
just think current codes are not good, so try to improve it.
I will send a v2 version later, in which I'll use null_blk to evaluate performance,
please have a check.

Regards,
Xiaoguang Wang






[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