Re: [PATCH v2 2/2] io_uring: io_queue_link*() right after submit

[Bob Liu]

On 11/6/19 5:31 PM, Pavel Begunkov wrote:
> On 11/6/2019 12:06 PM, Pavel Begunkov wrote:
>> On 11/6/2019 11:36 AM, Bob Liu wrote:
>>> On 11/6/19 5:22 AM, Pavel Begunkov wrote:
>>>> After a call to io_submit_sqe(), it's already known whether it needs
>>>> to queue a link or not. Do it there, as it's simplier and doesn't keep
>>>> an extra variable across the loop.
>>>>
>>>> Signed-off-by: Pavel Begunkov <asml.silence@xxxxxxxxx>
>>>> ---
>>>>  fs/io_uring.c | 22 ++++++++++------------
>>>>  1 file changed, 10 insertions(+), 12 deletions(-)
>>>>
>>>> diff --git a/fs/io_uring.c b/fs/io_uring.c
>>>> index ebe2a4edd644..82c2da99cb5c 100644
>>>> --- a/fs/io_uring.c
>>>> +++ b/fs/io_uring.c
>>>> @@ -2687,7 +2687,6 @@ static int io_submit_sqes(struct io_ring_ctx *ctx, unsigned int nr,
>>>>  	struct io_submit_state state, *statep = NULL;
>>>>  	struct io_kiocb *link = NULL;
>>>>  	struct io_kiocb *shadow_req = NULL;
>>>> -	bool prev_was_link = false;
>>>>  	int i, submitted = 0;
>>>>  	bool mm_fault = false;
>>>>  
>>>> @@ -2710,17 +2709,6 @@ static int io_submit_sqes(struct io_ring_ctx *ctx, unsigned int nr,
>>>>  			}
>>>>  		}
>>>>  
>>>> -		/*
>>>> -		 * If previous wasn't linked and we have a linked command,
>>>> -		 * that's the end of the chain. Submit the previous link.
>>>> -		 */
>>>> -		if (!prev_was_link && link) {
>>>> -			io_queue_link_head(ctx, link, &link->submit, shadow_req);
>>>> -			link = NULL;
>>>> -			shadow_req = NULL;
>>>> -		}
>>>> -		prev_was_link = (s.sqe->flags & IOSQE_IO_LINK) != 0;
>>>> -
>>>>  		if (link && (s.sqe->flags & IOSQE_IO_DRAIN)) {
>>>>  			if (!shadow_req) {
>>>>  				shadow_req = io_get_req(ctx, NULL);
>>>> @@ -2741,6 +2729,16 @@ static int io_submit_sqes(struct io_ring_ctx *ctx, unsigned int nr,
>>>>  		trace_io_uring_submit_sqe(ctx, s.sqe->user_data, true, async);
>>>>  		io_submit_sqe(ctx, &s, statep, &link);
>>>>  		submitted++;
>>>> +
>>>> +		/*
>>>> +		 * If previous wasn't linked and we have a linked command,
>>>> +		 * that's the end of the chain. Submit the previous link.
>>>> +		 */
>>>> +		if (!(s.sqe->flags & IOSQE_IO_LINK) && link) 
>>> The behavior changed to 'current seq' instead of previous after dropping prev_was_link?
>>>
>> The old behaviour was to remember @prev_was_link for current sqe, and
>> use at the beginning of the next iteration, where it becomes
>> "previous/last sqe". See, prev_was_link was set after io_queue_link_head.
>>
>> If @i is iteration idx, then timeline was:
>> i:   sqe[i-1].is_link -> io_queue_link_head() # if (prev_was_link)
>> i:   sqe[i].is_link = prev_was_link = (sqe[i].flags & LINK)
>> i+1: sqe[i].is_link -> io_queue_link_head() # if (prev_was_link)
>> i+1: sqe[i+1].is_link = ...
>>
>>
>> After the change, it's done at the same loop iteration by swapping order
>> of checking @prev_was_link and io_queue_link_head().
>>
>> i:   sqe[i].is_link = ...
>> i:   sqe[i].is_link -> io_queue_link_head()
>> i+1: sqe[i+1].is_link = ...
>> i+1: sqe[i+1].is_link -> io_queue_link_head()
>>
>> Shouldn't change the behavior, if I'm not missing something.
>>
> And the same goes for ordering with io_submit_sqe(), which assembles a link.
> 
> i:   prev_was_link = ... # for sqe[i]
> i:   io_submit_sqe() # for sqe[i]
> i+1: prev_was_link -> io_queue_link_head # for sqe[i]
> 
> after:
> i:   io_submit_sqe() # for sqe[i]
> i:   is_link = ... # for sqe[i]
> i:   is_link -> io_queue_link_head # for sqe[i]
> 

I see, sorry for the noise.
Reviewed-byï Bob Liu <bob.liu@xxxxxxxxxx>

>>
>>>> +			io_queue_link_head(ctx, link, &link->submit, shadow_req);
>>>> +			link = NULL;
>>>> +			shadow_req = NULL;
>>>> +		}
>>>>  	}
>>>>  
>>>>  	if (link)
>>>>
>>>