lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2020]   [Feb]   [12]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
SubjectRe: [RFC] eventfd: add EFD_AUTORESET flag
From
Date

On 12/02/2020 12.47, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
> On 12/02/20 11:29, Stefan Hajnoczi wrote:
>> On Wed, Feb 12, 2020 at 09:31:32AM +0100, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
>>> On 29/01/20 18:20, Stefan Hajnoczi wrote:
>>>> + /* Semaphore semantics don't make sense when autoreset is enabled */
>>>> + if ((flags & EFD_SEMAPHORE) && (flags & EFD_AUTORESET))
>>>> + return -EINVAL;
>>>> +
>>> I think they do, you just want to subtract 1 instead of setting the
>>> count to 0. This way, writing 1 would be the post operation on the
>>> semaphore, while poll() would be the wait operation.
>> True! Then EFD_AUTORESET is not a fitting name. EFD_AUTOREAD or
>> EFD_POLL_READS?
> Avi's suggestion also makes sense. Switching the event loop from poll()
> to IORING_OP_POLL_ADD would be good on its own, and then you could make
> it use IORING_OP_READV for eventfds.
>
> In QEMU parlance, perhaps you need a different abstraction than
> EventNotifier (let's call it WakeupNotifier) which would also use
> eventfd but it would provide a smaller API. Thanks to the smaller API,
> it would not need EFD_NONBLOCK, unlike the regular EventNotifier, and it
> could either set up a poll() handler calling read(), or use
> IORING_OP_READV when io_uring is in use.
>

Just to be clear, for best performance don't use IORING_OP_POLL_ADD,
just IORING_OP_READ. That's what you say in the second paragraph but the
first can be misleading.


\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2020-02-12 11:55    [W:0.091 / U:0.596 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site