On 4/19/22 11:31 AM, Kanchan Joshi wrote: > Hi Jens, > Few thoughts below toward the next version - > > On Fri, Apr 1, 2022 at 8:14 AM Jens Axboe <axboe@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > [snip] >>>>> Sure, will post the code with bigger-cqe first. >>>> >>>> I can add the support, should be pretty trivial. And do the liburing >>>> side as well, so we have a sane base. >>> >>> I will post the big-cqe based work today. It works with fio. >>> It does not deal with liburing (which seems tricky), but hopefully it >>> can help us move forward anyway . >> >> Let's compare then, since I just did the support too :-) > > Major difference is generic support (rather than uring-cmd only) and > not touching the regular completion path. So plan is to use your patch > for the next version with some bits added (e.g. overflow-handling and > avoiding extra CQE tail increment). Hope that sounds fine. I'll sanitize my branch today or tomorrow, it has overflow and proper cq ring management now, just hasn't been posted yet. So it should be complete. > We have things working on top of your current branch > "io_uring-big-sqe". Since SQE now has 8 bytes of free space (post > xattr merge) and CQE infra is different (post cqe-caching in ctx) - > things needed to be done a bit differently. But all this is now tested > better with liburing support/util (plan is to post that too). Just still grab the 16 bytes, we don't care about addr3 for passthrough. Should be no changes required there. -- Jens Axboe
