Re: [PATCH 2/2] io_uring: implementation of IOSQE_ASYNC_HYBRID logic

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

 



在 2021/10/9 下午8:46, Pavel Begunkov 写道:
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.Agree, I now realize that the explanation I put here is not good at all,
I actually want to say that the io-worker already set refs = 2 (also
possible that prep_link_out set 1, and io-worker adds the other 1,
previously I miss this situation). One will be put at completion time,
the other one will be put in io_wq_free_work(). So no need to set the
refcount here again. I looked into io_req_set_refcount(), since it does
nothing if refcount is already not zero, I should be ok to keep this one
as it was.

+     * 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
I'll look into it. I was thinking about to do the first nowait try in
the original context, but then I thought it doesn't make sense to bring
up a worker just for poll infra arming since thread creating and
scheduling has its overhead.





[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