On 9/13/21 4:41 AM, Eugene Syromiatnikov wrote:
> These are used to index elements in the argument
> of IORING_REGISTER_IOWQ_MAX_WORKERS io_uring_register command,
> so they are to be exposed in UAPI.
>
> Complements: 2e480058ddc21ec5 ("io-wq: provide a way to limit max number of workers")
> Signed-off-by: Eugene Syromiatnikov <esyr@xxxxxxxxxx>
> ---
> v2:
> - IO_WQ_ACCT_NR is no longer exposed directly in UAPI, per Jens Axboe's
> suggestion.
>
> v1: https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/20210912122411.GA27679@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx/
> ---
> fs/io-wq.c | 5 ++---
> include/uapi/linux/io_uring.h | 8 ++++++++
> 2 files changed, 10 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/fs/io-wq.c b/fs/io-wq.c
> index 6c55362..eb5162d 100644
> --- a/fs/io-wq.c
> +++ b/fs/io-wq.c
> @@ -14,6 +14,7 @@
> #include <linux/rculist_nulls.h>
> #include <linux/cpu.h>
> #include <linux/tracehook.h>
> +#include <uapi/linux/io_uring.h>
>
> #include "io-wq.h"
>
> @@ -78,9 +79,7 @@ struct io_wqe_acct {
> };
>
> enum {
> - IO_WQ_ACCT_BOUND,
> - IO_WQ_ACCT_UNBOUND,
> - IO_WQ_ACCT_NR,
> + IO_WQ_ACCT_NR = __IO_WQ_ACCT_MAX
> };
>
> /*
> diff --git a/include/uapi/linux/io_uring.h b/include/uapi/linux/io_uring.h
> index 59ef351..dae1841 100644
> --- a/include/uapi/linux/io_uring.h
> +++ b/include/uapi/linux/io_uring.h
> @@ -324,6 +324,14 @@ enum {
> IORING_REGISTER_LAST
> };
>
> +/* io-wq worker limit categories */
> +enum {
> + IO_WQ_ACCT_BOUND,
> + IO_WQ_ACCT_UNBOUND,
> +
> + __IO_WQ_ACCT_MAX /* Non-UAPI */
> +};
This is really the same thing as before, just the names have changed.
What I suggested was keeping the enum in io_uring, then just adding
enum {
IO_WQ_BOUND,
IO_WQ_UNBOUND,
};
to uapi header. The ACCT stuff is io-wq specific too, that kind of naming
shouldn't be propagated to userspace.
A BUILD_BUG_ON() could be added for them being different, but honestly
I don't think that's worth it.
--
Jens Axboe
