From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.6 (2021-04-09) on gnuweeb.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.0 required=5.0 tests=DKIM_SIGNED,DKIM_VALID, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,NICE_REPLY_A, SPF_HELO_PASS,SPF_SOFTFAIL autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.6 Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id CC3A2C433EF for ; Thu, 9 Jun 2022 15:06:36 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S237328AbiFIPGe (ORCPT ); Thu, 9 Jun 2022 11:06:34 -0400 Received: from lindbergh.monkeyblade.net ([23.128.96.19]:52094 "EHLO lindbergh.monkeyblade.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S237135AbiFIPG0 (ORCPT ); Thu, 9 Jun 2022 11:06:26 -0400 Received: from mail-lf1-x135.google.com (mail-lf1-x135.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:4864:20::135]) by lindbergh.monkeyblade.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id C50D22823ED for ; Thu, 9 Jun 2022 08:06:24 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-lf1-x135.google.com with SMTP id u23so38474616lfc.1 for ; Thu, 09 Jun 2022 08:06:24 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=kernel-dk.20210112.gappssmtp.com; s=20210112; h=message-id:date:mime-version:user-agent:subject:content-language:to :cc:references:from:in-reply-to:content-transfer-encoding; bh=raEvZkK9yVRe4ZvotPm4rs+VlUPCqHdGyTgcRCfaNSk=; b=d3eM1T7+rsbqPMQi5UKoYgBQNYw8gbt1nfmPo+eYD8UOXVvI0eviB15fXayaoQNxT8 oXDYuE+Ixd8icq8kF0fcBzMlzMPfANQyOBeeqkemdWefGwN3QLlrEZluOMUudcWBVRmm FD0WVFhNEAjWFsII84sFwnJ/XMrdjBVvggmlRMuEyFfb48TzDLXb7brWWaDNdK5ar/bK LulETZuYXCBJFEBWymi78fJa4uzW9NwDEWvpFg3bvXI+UjKSskp96sNY+GVR6zFiGcU0 /SEUa0+tYU+p650ze1aXbJcSOlhst7kxz62zzoCQY+/6+90Db+yO3BsYzM5v68nzR5wi mpWA== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20210112; h=x-gm-message-state:message-id:date:mime-version:user-agent:subject :content-language:to:cc:references:from:in-reply-to :content-transfer-encoding; bh=raEvZkK9yVRe4ZvotPm4rs+VlUPCqHdGyTgcRCfaNSk=; b=b7QSW1WMjZ3EswQS2iDy/+sXfs7SHrUXHdqJBVDlfUNIONqSmfF9mByRrVECHa0SOR RuvP/brMG+Cv/gwe0f4H6nL4DqQdDcg0AxGb+rtPEFpSbpUcZ01Pa3nOg2Vom/ZuzkF1 M2fL1v4yFnc8tm0wBbe8Rvb43smJ0WKg8BaZjcfq1eYK0+WHWtKqOXy1JPx6R1PGDGod 9zIb0Q3bdpR3N0NAiIhqmvsD54O9QETNY0Ztfgg3E4aLPmd4DKnnaRMt4nN0MJon6zAT AF5E56x+HaguayxTjXSKDfdCWfwm40WFVo/qtYukXrLKmuSDwkPbLXoa7pL4j1WBs+S9 FfLw== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM533YF7VUIBHTxCRxqFVWs/l1rMn/i4mVo6C6Krbh84tZNlHM2ML8 H/xXWBT4nAxZCqxFIpnPLQqjMg== X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJyGLlGyAehwilCYwqOFdeN54FGL7em1ZhxGKFsBdcBSVip+aoadvAXqLI8j+hDM2QJSmYKkVQ== X-Received: by 2002:a05:6512:c04:b0:478:f837:d813 with SMTP id z4-20020a0565120c0400b00478f837d813mr26188230lfu.17.1654787182907; Thu, 09 Jun 2022 08:06:22 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [192.168.172.199] (176-20-186-40-dynamic.dk.customer.tdc.net. [176.20.186.40]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id w23-20020a2e1617000000b00253ebd8805bsm3719785ljd.24.2022.06.09.08.06.21 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 bits=128/128); Thu, 09 Jun 2022 08:06:22 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <78e3cf67-a3f2-0ca3-4b83-27aa738c3b20@kernel.dk> Date: Thu, 9 Jun 2022 09:06:21 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux aarch64; rv:91.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/91.10.0 Subject: Re: Possible bug for ring-mapped provided buffer Content-Language: en-US To: Hao Xu , io-uring Cc: Pavel Begunkov References: <1884ea45-07df-303a-c22c-319a2394b20f@linux.dev> <7c563209-7b33-4cc8-86d9-fecfef68c274@kernel.dk> <8ec6116d-39cd-ed6c-3477-9165d1a27128@kernel.dk> From: Jens Axboe In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: io-uring@vger.kernel.org On 6/9/22 4:32 AM, Hao Xu wrote: > On 6/9/22 18:19, Jens Axboe wrote: >> On 6/9/22 4:14 AM, Hao Xu wrote: >>> On 6/9/22 18:06, Jens Axboe wrote: >>>> On 6/9/22 1:53 AM, Hao Xu wrote: >>>>> Hi all, >>>>> I haven't done tests to demonstrate it. It is for partial io case, we >>>>> don't consume/release the buffer before arm_poll in ring-mapped mode. >>>>> But seems we should? Otherwise ring head isn't moved and other requests >>>>> may take that buffer. What do I miss? >>>> >>>> On vacation this week, so can't take a look at the code. But the >>>> principle is precisely not to consume the buffer if we arm poll, because >>>> then the next one can grab it instead. We don't want to consume a buffer >>>> over poll, as that defeats the purpose of a provided buffer. It should >>>> be grabbed and consumed only if we can use it right now. >>>> >>>> Hence the way it should work is that we DON'T consume the buffer in this >>>> case, and that someone else can just use it. At the same time, we should >>>> ensure that we grab a NEW buffer for this case, whenever the poll >>> >>> If we grab a new buffer for it, then we have to copy the data since we >>> have done partial io...this also defeats the purpose of this feature. >> >> For partial IO, we never drop the buffer. See the logic in >> io_kbuf_recycle(). It should be as follows: > > Yea, in io_kbuf_recycle(), if it's partial io, we just return. For > legacy mode, this means we keep the buffer. For ring-mapped mode, this > means we then release the uring_lock without moving the ring->head, > and then other requests may take that buffer which is in use.. > And next time we do (for example) recv(), we lost the data which we got > at the previous time. > Do I miss something? If we don't commit for ring mapped buffers, then yeah that's definitely a bug. Please send a fix :-) Pavel can take care of it this week. -- Jens Axboe