On 10/8/21 13:36, Hao Xu wrote:
The process of this kind of requests is:
step1: original context:
queue it to io-worker
step2: io-worker context:
nonblock try(the old logic is a synchronous try here)
|
|--fail--> arm poll
|
|--(fail/ready)-->synchronous issue
|
|--(succeed)-->worker finish it's job, tw
take over the req
This works much better than IOSQE_ASYNC in cases where cpu resources
are scarce or unbound max_worker is small. In these cases, number of
io-worker eazily increments to max_worker, new worker cannot be created
and running workers stuck there handling old works in IOSQE_ASYNC mode.
In my machine, set unbound max_worker to 20, run echo-server, turns out:
(arguments: register_file, connetion number is 1000, message size is 12
Byte)
IOSQE_ASYNC: 76664.151 tps
IOSQE_ASYNC_HYBRID: 166934.985 tps
Suggested-by: Jens Axboe <axboe@xxxxxxxxx>
Signed-off-by: Hao Xu <haoxu@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
---
fs/io_uring.c | 42 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++----
1 file changed, 38 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
diff --git a/fs/io_uring.c b/fs/io_uring.c
index a99f7f46e6d4..024cef09bc12 100644
--- a/fs/io_uring.c
+++ b/fs/io_uring.c
@@ -1409,7 +1409,7 @@ static void io_prep_async_work(struct io_kiocb *req)
req->work.list.next = NULL;
req->work.flags = 0;
- if (req->flags & REQ_F_FORCE_ASYNC)
+ if (req->flags & (REQ_F_FORCE_ASYNC | REQ_F_ASYNC_HYBRID))
req->work.flags |= IO_WQ_WORK_CONCURRENT;
if (req->flags & REQ_F_ISREG) {
@@ -5575,7 +5575,13 @@ static int io_arm_poll_handler(struct io_kiocb *req)
req->apoll = apoll;
req->flags |= REQ_F_POLLED;
ipt.pt._qproc = io_async_queue_proc;
- io_req_set_refcount(req);
+ /*
+ * REQ_F_REFCOUNT set indicate we are in io-worker context, where we
Nope, it indicates that needs more complex refcounting. It includes linked
timeouts but also poll because of req_ref_get for double poll. fwiw, with
some work it can be removed for polls, harder (and IMHO not necessary) to do
for timeouts.
+ * already explicitly set the submittion and completion ref. So no
I'd say there is no notion of submission vs completion refs anymore.
+ * need to set refcount here if that is the case.
+ */
+ if (!(req->flags & REQ_F_REFCOUNT))
Compare it with io_req_set_refcount(), that "if" is a a no-op
+ io_req_set_refcount(req);
ret = __io_arm_poll_handler(req, &apoll->poll, &ipt, mask,
io_async_wake);
@@ -6704,8 +6710,11 @@ static void io_wq_submit_work(struct io_wq_work *work)
ret = -ECANCELED;
if (!ret) {
+ bool need_poll = req->flags & REQ_F_ASYNC_HYBRID;
+
do {
- ret = io_issue_sqe(req, 0);
+issue_sqe:
+ ret = io_issue_sqe(req, need_poll ? IO_URING_F_NONBLOCK : 0);
It's buggy, you will get all kinds of kernel crashes and leaks.
Currently IO_URING_F_NONBLOCK has dual meaning: obvious nonblock but
also whether we hold uring_lock or not. You'd need to split the flag
into two, i.e. IO_URING_F_LOCKED
--
Pavel Begunkov
