On Mon, Jun 09, 2025 at 03:29:34PM -0700, Caleb Sander Mateos wrote:
> On Mon, Jun 9, 2025 at 5:14 AM Ming Lei <ming.lei@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> >
> > Document recently merged feature auto buffer registration(UBLK_F_AUTO_BUF_REG).
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Ming Lei <ming.lei@xxxxxxxxxx>
>
> Thanks, this is a nice explanation. Just a few suggestions.
>
> > ---
> > Documentation/block/ublk.rst | 67 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> > 1 file changed, 67 insertions(+)
> >
> > diff --git a/Documentation/block/ublk.rst b/Documentation/block/ublk.rst
> > index c368e1081b41..16ffca54eed4 100644
> > --- a/Documentation/block/ublk.rst
> > +++ b/Documentation/block/ublk.rst
> > @@ -352,6 +352,73 @@ For reaching best IO performance, ublk server should align its segment
> > parameter of `struct ublk_param_segment` with backend for avoiding
> > unnecessary IO split, which usually hurts io_uring performance.
> >
> > +Auto Buffer Registration
> > +------------------------
> > +
> > +The ``UBLK_F_AUTO_BUF_REG`` feature automatically handles buffer registration
> > +and unregistration for I/O requests, which simplifies the buffer management
> > +process and reduces overhead in the ublk server implementation.
> > +
> > +This is another feature flag for using zero copy, and it is compatible with
> > +``UBLK_F_SUPPORT_ZERO_COPY``.
> > +
> > +Feature Overview
> > +~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
> > +
> > +This feature automatically registers request buffers to the io_uring context
> > +before delivering I/O commands to the ublk server and unregisters them when
> > +completing I/O commands. This eliminates the need for manual buffer
> > +registration/unregistration via ``UBLK_IO_REGISTER_IO_BUF`` and
> > +``UBLK_IO_UNREGISTER_IO_BUF`` commands, then IO handling in ublk server
> > +can avoid dependency on the two uring_cmd operations.
> > +
> > +This way not only simplifies ublk server implementation, but also makes
> > +concurrent IO handling becomes possible.
>
> I'm not sure what "concurrent IO handling" refers to. Any ublk server
> can handle incoming I/O requests concurrently, regardless of what
> features it has enabled. Do you mean it avoids the need for linked
> io_uring requests to properly order buffer registration and
> unregistration with the I/O operations using the registered buffer?
Yes, if io_uring OPs depends on buffer registering & unregistering, these
OPs can't be issued concurrently any more, that is one io_uring constraint.
I will add the above words.
>
> > +
> > +Usage Requirements
> > +~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
> > +
> > +1. The ublk server must create a sparse buffer table on the same ``io_ring_ctx``
> > + used for ``UBLK_IO_FETCH_REQ`` and ``UBLK_IO_COMMIT_AND_FETCH_REQ``.
> > +
> > +2. If uring_cmd is issued on a different ``io_ring_ctx``, manual buffer
> > + unregistration is required.
>
> nit: don't think this needs to be a separate point, could be combined with (1).
OK.
>
> > +
> > +3. Buffer registration data must be passed via uring_cmd's ``sqe->addr`` with the
> > + following structure::
>
> nit: extra ":"
In reStructuredText (reST), the double colon :: serves as a literal block marker to
indicate preformatted text.
>
> > +
> > + struct ublk_auto_buf_reg {
> > + __u16 index; /* Buffer index for registration */
> > + __u8 flags; /* Registration flags */
> > + __u8 reserved0; /* Reserved for future use */
> > + __u32 reserved1; /* Reserved for future use */
> > + };
>
> Suggest using ublk_auto_buf_reg_to_sqe_addr()? Otherwise, it seems
> ambiguous how this struct is "passed" in sqe->addr.
OK
>
> > +
> > +4. All reserved fields in ``ublk_auto_buf_reg`` must be zeroed.
> > +
> > +5. Optional flags can be passed via ``ublk_auto_buf_reg.flags``.
> > +
> > +Fallback Behavior
> > +~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
> > +
> > +When ``UBLK_AUTO_BUF_REG_FALLBACK`` is enabled:
> > +
> > +1. If auto buffer registration fails:
>
> I would switch these. Both (1) and (2) refer to when auto buffer
> registration fails. So I would expect something like:
>
> If auto buffer registration fails:
>
> 1. When ``UBLK_AUTO_BUF_REG_FALLBACK`` is enabled:
> ...
> 2. If fallback is not enabled:
> ...
>
> > + - The uring_cmd is completed
>
> Maybe add "without registering the request buffer"?
>
> > + - ``UBLK_IO_F_NEED_REG_BUF`` is set in ``ublksrv_io_desc.op_flags``
> > + - The ublk server must manually register the buffer
>
> Only if it wants a registered buffer for the ublk request. Technically
> the ublk server could decide to fall back on user-copy, for example.
Good catch!
>
> > +
> > +2. If fallback is not enabled:
> > + - The ublk I/O request fails silently
>
> "silently" is a bit ambiguous. It's certainly not silent to the
> application submitting the ublk I/O. Maybe say that the ublk I/O
> request fails and no uring_cmd is completed to the ublk server?
Yes, but the document focus on ublk side, and the client is generic
for every driver, so I guess it may be fine.
>
> > +
> > +Limitations
> > +~~~~~~~~~~~
> > +
> > +- Requires same ``io_ring_ctx`` for all operations
>
> Another limitation that prevents us from adopting the auto buffer
> registration feature is the need to reserve a unique buffer table
> index for every ublk tag on the io_ring_ctx. Since the io_ring_ctx
> buffer table has a max size of 16K (could potentially be increased to
> 64K), this limit is easily reached when there are a large number of
> ublk devices or the ublk queue depth is large. I think we could remove
> this limitation in the future by adding support for allocating buffer
> indices on demand, analogous to IORING_FILE_INDEX_ALLOC.
OK.
But I guess it isn't big deal in reality since the task context should
be saturated easily with so big setting.
UBLK_F_PER_IO_DAEMON should alleviate the limit by adding more tasks/io_ring_ctx.
Also I am working on BATCH_IO[1] feature to allow one queue to be served
by multiple contexts, meantime one context can serve more than one queue
too in easy & dynamic & batch way. Then the 16K limit can be alleviated
too.
https://github.com/ming1/linux/commits/ublk2-cmd-batch/
Thanks,
Ming
