[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CAJfpegsVJo9e=pHf3YGWkE16fT0QaNGhgkUdq4KUQypXaD=OgQ@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 12 Aug 2020 10:37:08 +0200
From: Miklos Szeredi <miklos@...redi.hu>
To: David Howells <dhowells@...hat.com>
Cc: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
linux-fsdevel <linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org>,
Al Viro <viro@...iv.linux.org.uk>, Karel Zak <kzak@...hat.com>,
Jeff Layton <jlayton@...hat.com>,
Miklos Szeredi <mszeredi@...hat.com>,
Nicolas Dichtel <nicolas.dichtel@...nd.com>,
Christian Brauner <christian@...uner.io>,
Lennart Poettering <lennart@...ttering.net>,
Linux API <linux-api@...r.kernel.org>,
Ian Kent <raven@...maw.net>,
LSM <linux-security-module@...r.kernel.org>,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: file metadata via fs API (was: [GIT PULL] Filesystem Information)
On Wed, Aug 12, 2020 at 10:29 AM David Howells <dhowells@...hat.com> wrote:
>
> Miklos Szeredi <miklos@...redi.hu> wrote:
>
> > Worried about performance? Io-uring will allow you to do all those
> > five syscalls (or many more) with just one I/O submission.
>
> io_uring isn't going to help here. We're talking about synchronous reads.
> AIUI, you're adding a couple more syscalls to the list and running stuff in a
> side thread to save the effort of going in and out of the kernel five times.
> But you still have to pay the set up/tear down costs on the fds and do the
> pathwalks. io_uring doesn't magically make that cost disappear.
>
> io_uring also requires resources such as a kernel accessible ring buffer to
> make it work.
>
> You're proposing making everything else more messy just to avoid a dedicated
> syscall. Could you please set out your reasoning for that?
a) A dedicated syscall with a complex binary API is a non-trivial
maintenance burden.
b) The awarded performance boost is not warranted for the use cases it
is designed for.
Thanks,
Miklos
Powered by blists - more mailing lists