[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CAJfpegu8AXZWQh3W39PriqxVna+t3D2pz23t_4xEVxGcNf1AUA@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 14 Jul 2020 10:07:02 +0200
From: Miklos Szeredi <miklos@...redi.hu>
To: Pavel Machek <pavel@...x.de>
Cc: Greg KH <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
Jan Ziak <0xe2.0x9a.0x9b@...il.com>,
Linux API <linux-api@...r.kernel.org>,
linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
linux-kselftest@...r.kernel.org,
linux-man <linux-man@...r.kernel.org>,
Michael Kerrisk <mtk.manpages@...il.com>, shuah@...nel.org,
Al Viro <viro@...iv.linux.org.uk>, io-uring@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/3] readfile(2): a new syscall to make open/read/close faster
On Tue, Jul 14, 2020 at 8:51 AM Pavel Machek <pavel@...x.de> wrote:
>
> Hi!
>
> > > At first, I thought that the proposed system call is capable of
> > > reading *multiple* small files using a single system call - which
> > > would help increase HDD/SSD queue utilization and increase IOPS (I/O
> > > operations per second) - but that isn't the case and the proposed
> > > system call can read just a single file.
> >
> > If you want to do this for multple files, use io_ring, that's what it
> > was designed for. I think Jens was going to be adding support for the
> > open/read/close pattern to it as well, after some other more pressing
> > features/fixes were finished.
>
> What about... just using io_uring for single file, too? I'm pretty
> sure it can be wrapped in a library that is simple to use, avoiding
> need for new syscall.
Just wondering: is there a plan to add strace support to io_uring?
And I don't just mean the syscalls associated with io_uring, but
tracing the ring itself.
I think that's quite important as io_uring becomes mainstream.
Thanks,
Miklos
Powered by blists - more mailing lists