lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2001]   [Feb]   [2]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [Kiobuf-io-devel] Re: 1st glance at kiobuf overhead in kernelaio vs pread vs user aio
Benjamin LaHaise wrote:
>
> Hey Ingo,
>
> On Fri, 2 Feb 2001, Ingo Molnar wrote:
>
> > - first of all, great patch! I've got a conceptual question: exactly how
> > does the AIO code prevent filesystem-related scheduling in the issuing
> > process' context? I'd like to use (and test) your AIO code for TUX, but i
> > do not see where it's guaranteed that the process that does the aio does
> > not block - from the patch this is not yet clear to me. (Right now TUX
> > uses separate 'async IO' kernel threads to avoid this problem.) Or if it's
> > not yet possible, what are the plans to handle this?
>
> Thanks! Right now the code does the page cache lookup allocations and
> lookups in the caller's thread, the write path then attempts to lock all
> pages sequentially during io using the async page locking function
> wtd_lock_page. I've tried to get this close to some of the ideas proposed
> by Jeff Merkey, and have implemented async page and buffer locking
> mechanisms so far. The down in the write path is still synchronous,
> mostly because I want some feedback before going much further down this
> path. The read path verifies the up2date state of individual pages, and
> if it encounters one which is not, then it queues the request for the
> worker thread which calls readpage on all the pages that need updating.

[ Ben, good to see you have a patch to send, something which I've been requesting
you for sometime now ;-) ]

Do you really have worker threads? In my reading of the patch it seems
that the wtd is serviced by keventd. And by using mapped kiobuf's you've
avoided issues such as:

a. (not) requiring a requestor's process context to perform the copy (copy-out
on read, for example)
b. avoiding requestor's (user) page from being unmapped when a
__iodesc_read_finish is being executed.

These are two major improvements I'm glad to see over my earlier KAIO patch
(obURL: http://oss.sgi.com/projects/kaio/) ... of course, several abstractions,
including kiobufs & more generic task queues in 2.4 have made this easier,
which is a good thing.

I see several similarities to the KAIO patch too; stuff like splitting
generic_read routine (which now you have expanded to include the write
routine also), and the handling of RAW devices.

A nice addition in your patch is the introduction of kiobuf as a common container of
pages, which in the KAIO patch was handled with an ad-hoc (page *) vector
for non RAW & kiobuf's for the RAW case.

One point which is not clear is how one would implement aio_suspend(...)
which waits for any ONE of N aiocb's to complete. The aio_complete(...)
routine in your patch expects a particular idx to wait on, so I assume
as is, only one aiocb can be waited upon. Am I correct? This particular
case is solved in the KAIO patch ...

Also, can you also put out a library that goes with the kernel patch?
I can imagine what it would look like, but ...

Cheers,

ananth.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------
Rajagopal Ananthanarayanan ("ananth")
Member Technical Staff, SGI.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2005-03-22 13:28    [W:0.058 / U:8.204 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site