mirror of https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Aleksander Trofimowicz <trof@n90.eu>
To: fuse-devel@lists.linux.dev, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Cc: Aleksander Trofimowicz <trof@n90.eu>
Subject: [RFC PATCH 0/1] fuse: per-queue background request accounting for io-uring
Date: Fri, 16 Oct 2026 12:48:10 +0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20261016124820.316741-1-trof@n90.eu> (raw)

fuse: per-queue background request accounting for io-uring

This RFC proposes an opt-in path to replace the connection-wide
background request accounting in fuse io-uring with per-queue
budgeting.

AFAIR the concept has already floated on the list, but nothing has
come to fruition. Nonetheless the problem is obvious: the existing
implementation relies on a single connection-wide spinlock
(fch->bg_lock) that is taken twice while servicing background
requests. That severely hampers the scalability of fuse io-uring for
certain types of workload (e.g. direct async I/O). Suffice it to say,
with this patch applied I can easily cross the 1M 4k random read IOPS
barrier, while the baseline gives a mere 600k IOPS (caeteris paribus).

I envision this enhancement being negotiated with a daemon, but for
your convenience the feature can currently be activated
unconditionally via the uring_max_bg_per_queue_force parameter. Mind
that the value of uring_max_bg_per_queue must also be increased to
obtain any meaningful results.

I am looking forward to your feedback. Thanks in advance.

Aleksander Trofimowicz (1):
  fuse: per-queue background request accounting for io-uring

 fs/fuse/control.c         |   5 +-
 fs/fuse/dev.c             |  93 ++++++++++++++++---
 fs/fuse/dev.h             |  22 ++++-
 fs/fuse/dev_uring.c       | 187 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++----
 fs/fuse/dev_uring_i.h     |  32 +++++++
 fs/fuse/fuse_dev_i.h      |  18 ++++
 fs/fuse/inode.c           |  13 ++-
 include/uapi/linux/fuse.h |  11 ++-
 8 files changed, 347 insertions(+), 34 deletions(-)


base-commit: 2f2f7eeef8b0a1a9b9ca998231419873ccae8d4e
--
2.56.0


             reply	other threads:[~2026-10-16 12:57 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 3+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2026-10-16 12:48 Aleksander Trofimowicz [this message]
2026-10-16 12:48 ` [RFC PATCH 1/1] " Aleksander Trofimowicz
2026-10-16 13:15 ` [RFC PATCH 0/1] " Bernd Schubert

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=20261016124820.316741-1-trof@n90.eu \
    --to=trof@n90.eu \
    --cc=fuse-devel@lists.linux.dev \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox

all inboxes | Powered by JetHome®