On 5/1/22 7:14 AM, Pavel Begunkov wrote: > On 4/29/22 18:56, Jens Axboe wrote: >> Hi, >> >> This series builds to adding support for a different way of doing >> provided buffers. The interesting bits here are patch 11, which also has >> some performance numbers an an explanation of it. > > Jens, would be great if you can CC me for large changes, you know > how it's with mailing lists nowadays... You bet, I can just add you to anything posted. Starting to lose faith in email ever becoming reliable again... > 1) reading "io_uring: abstract out provided buffer list selection" > > Let's move io_ring_submit_unlock() to where the lock call is. > In the end, it's only confusing and duplicates unlock in > io_ring_buffer_select() and io_provided_buffer_select(). Sure, I can clean that up. > 2) As it's a new API, let's do bucket selection right, I quite > don't like io_buffer_get_list(). We can replace "bgid" with > indexes into an array and let the userspace to handle indexing. > Most likely it knows the index right away or can implement indexes > lookup with as many tricks and caching it needs. Maybe we can just use xarray here rather than a hashed list? It's really just a sparse array. The downside is that xarray locking isn't always very convenient, eg using it with your own locking... Any other suggestions? -- Jens Axboe
