On Fri, Apr 22, 2022 at 08:39:18AM +0530, Kanchan Joshi wrote:
On Thu, Apr 21, 2022 at 12:59:42PM -0600, Jens Axboe wrote:
On 4/21/22 12:57 PM, Pavel Begunkov wrote:
On 4/21/22 19:49, Stefan Roesch wrote:
On 4/21/22 11:42 AM, Pavel Begunkov wrote:
On 4/20/22 23:51, Jens Axboe wrote:
On Wed, 20 Apr 2022 12:14:39 -0700, Stefan Roesch wrote:
This adds the large CQE support for io-uring. Large CQE's are 16 bytes longer.
To support the longer CQE's the allocation part is changed and when the CQE is
accessed.
The allocation of the large CQE's is twice as big, so the allocation size is
doubled. The ring size calculation needs to take this into account.
I'm missing something here, do we have a user for it apart
from no-op requests?
Pavel, what started this work is the patch series "io_uring passthru over nvme" from samsung.
(https://lore.kernel.org/io-uring/20220308152105.309618-1-joshi.k@xxxxxxxxxxx/)
They will use the large SQE and CQE support.
I see, thanks for clarifying. I saw it used in passthrough
patches, but it only got me more confused why it's applied
aforehand separately from the io_uring-cmd and passthrough
It's just applied to a branch so the passthrough folks have something to
base on, io_uring-big-sqe. It's not queued for 5.19 or anything like
that yet.
Thanks for putting this up.
I am bit confused whether these (big-cqe) and big-sqe patches should
continue be sent (to nvme list too) as part of next
uring-cmd/passthrough series?
And does it make sense to squash somes patches of this series; at
high-level there is 32b-CQE support, and no-op support.
Maybe as part of v3, as there seems some scope for that (I made comments
at respective places).
