lists.openwall.net | lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC | |
Open Source and information security mailing list archives
| ||
|
Date: Thu, 24 Jul 2014 09:57:16 +0800 From: Ming Lei <ming.lei@...onical.com> To: Zach Brown <zab@...bo.net> Cc: Jens Axboe <axboe@...nel.dk>, Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>, Dave Kleikamp <dave.kleikamp@...cle.com>, Benjamin LaHaise <bcrl@...ck.org>, Alexander Viro <viro@...iv.linux.org.uk>, Linux FS Devel <linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org>, "open list:AIO" <linux-aio@...ck.org>, Kent Overstreet <kmo@...erainc.com> Subject: Re: [PATCH 7/9] aio: add aio_kernel_() interface On Thu, Jul 24, 2014 at 7:16 AM, Zach Brown <zab@...bo.net> wrote: > On Thu, Jul 24, 2014 at 06:55:28AM +0800, Ming Lei wrote: >> From: Dave Kleikamp <dave.kleikamp@...cle.com> >> >> This adds an interface that lets kernel callers submit aio iocbs without >> going through the user space syscalls. This lets kernel callers avoid >> the management limits and overhead of the context. It will also let us >> integrate aio operations with other kernel apis that the user space >> interface doesn't have access to. >> >> This patch is based on Dave's posts in below links: >> >> https://lkml.org/lkml/2013/10/16/365 >> https://groups.google.com/forum/#!topic/linux.kernel/l7mogGJZoKQ > > This was originally written a billion years ago when dinosaurs roamed > the earth. Also, notably, before Kent and Ben reworked a bunch of the Not so far away, this patch is based on Dave's last version of V9, which was posted in Oct, 2013, :-) > aio core. I'd want them to take a look at this patch to make sure that > it doesn't rely on any assumptions that have changed. Looks I missed to Cc Ken, :-( > >> +/* opcode values not exposed to user space */ >> +enum { >> + IOCB_CMD_READ_ITER = 0x10000, >> + IOCB_CMD_WRITE_ITER = 0x10001, >> +}; > > And I think the consensus was that this isn't good enough. Find a way > to encode the kernel caller ops without polluting the uiocb cmd name > space. That is easy, since the two cmd names are only for kernel AIO, whatever should be OK, but looks I didn't see such comment. > > (I've now come to think that this entire approach of having loop use aio > is misguided and that the way forward is to have dio consume what loop > naturally produces -- bios, blk-mq rqs, whatever -- but I'm on to other Yes, that is what these patches are doing, and actually AIO's model is a good match to driver's interface. Lots of drivers use the asynchronous model(submit, complete, ...). > things these days.) At least, loop can improve its throughput much by kernel AIO without big changes to fs/direct-io(attribute much to ITER_BVEC), and vhost-scsi should benefit from it too. Thanks, -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists