From: Pavel Begunkov <[email protected]>
To: Jens Axboe <[email protected]>, [email protected]
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/4] io_uring: patch up IOPOLL overflow_flush sync
Date: Sun, 3 Jan 2021 16:29:32 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <[email protected]> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <[email protected]>
On 03/01/2021 15:12, Jens Axboe wrote:
> On 1/2/21 9:06 AM, Pavel Begunkov wrote:
>> IOPOLL skips completion locking but keeps it under uring_lock, thus
>> io_cqring_overflow_flush() and so io_cqring_events() need extra care.
>> Add extra conditional locking around them.
>
> This one is pretty ugly. Would be greatly preferable to grab the lock
> higher up instead of passing down the need to do so, imho.
I can't disagree with that, the whole iopoll locking is a mess, but
still don't want to penalise SQPOLL|IOPOLL.
Splitting flushing from cqring_events might be a good idea. How
about the one below (not tested)? Killing this noflush looks even
cleaner than before.
diff --git a/fs/io_uring.c b/fs/io_uring.c
index 00dd85acd039..099f50de4aa5 100644
--- a/fs/io_uring.c
+++ b/fs/io_uring.c
@@ -1712,9 +1712,9 @@ static void io_cqring_ev_posted(struct io_ring_ctx *ctx)
}
/* Returns true if there are no backlogged entries after the flush */
-static bool io_cqring_overflow_flush(struct io_ring_ctx *ctx, bool force,
- struct task_struct *tsk,
- struct files_struct *files)
+static bool __io_cqring_overflow_flush(struct io_ring_ctx *ctx, bool force,
+ struct task_struct *tsk,
+ struct files_struct *files)
{
struct io_rings *rings = ctx->rings;
struct io_kiocb *req, *tmp;
@@ -1767,6 +1767,27 @@ static bool io_cqring_overflow_flush(struct io_ring_ctx *ctx, bool force,
return all_flushed;
}
+static bool io_cqring_overflow_flush(struct io_ring_ctx *ctx, bool force,
+ struct task_struct *tsk,
+ struct files_struct *files)
+{
+ if (test_bit(0, &ctx->cq_check_overflow)) {
+ bool ret, iopoll = ctx->flags & IORING_SETUP_IOPOLL;
+
+ /*
+ * iopoll doesn't care about ctx->completion_lock but uses
+ * ctx->uring_lock
+ */
+ if (iopoll)
+ mutex_lock(&ctx->uring_lock);
+ ret = __io_cqring_overflow_flush(ctx, force, tsk, files);
+ if (iopoll)
+ mutex_unlock(&ctx->uring_lock);
+ return ret;
+ }
+ return true;
+}
+
static void __io_cqring_fill_event(struct io_kiocb *req, long res, long cflags)
{
struct io_ring_ctx *ctx = req->ctx;
@@ -2312,20 +2333,8 @@ static void io_double_put_req(struct io_kiocb *req)
io_free_req(req);
}
-static unsigned io_cqring_events(struct io_ring_ctx *ctx, bool noflush)
+static unsigned io_cqring_events(struct io_ring_ctx *ctx)
{
- if (test_bit(0, &ctx->cq_check_overflow)) {
- /*
- * noflush == true is from the waitqueue handler, just ensure
- * we wake up the task, and the next invocation will flush the
- * entries. We cannot safely to it from here.
- */
- if (noflush)
- return -1U;
-
- io_cqring_overflow_flush(ctx, false, NULL, NULL);
- }
-
/* See comment at the top of this file */
smp_rmb();
return __io_cqring_events(ctx);
@@ -2550,7 +2559,8 @@ static int io_iopoll_check(struct io_ring_ctx *ctx, long min)
* If we do, we can potentially be spinning for commands that
* already triggered a CQE (eg in error).
*/
- if (io_cqring_events(ctx, false))
+ __io_cqring_overflow_flush(ctx, false, NULL, NULL);
+ if (io_cqring_events(ctx))
break;
/*
@@ -6825,7 +6835,7 @@ static int io_submit_sqes(struct io_ring_ctx *ctx, unsigned int nr)
/* if we have a backlog and couldn't flush it all, return BUSY */
if (test_bit(0, &ctx->sq_check_overflow)) {
- if (!io_cqring_overflow_flush(ctx, false, NULL, NULL))
+ if (!__io_cqring_overflow_flush(ctx, false, NULL, NULL))
return -EBUSY;
}
@@ -7088,7 +7098,7 @@ struct io_wait_queue {
unsigned nr_timeouts;
};
-static inline bool io_should_wake(struct io_wait_queue *iowq, bool noflush)
+static inline bool io_should_wake(struct io_wait_queue *iowq)
{
struct io_ring_ctx *ctx = iowq->ctx;
@@ -7097,7 +7107,7 @@ static inline bool io_should_wake(struct io_wait_queue *iowq, bool noflush)
* started waiting. For timeouts, we always want to return to userspace,
* regardless of event count.
*/
- return io_cqring_events(ctx, noflush) >= iowq->to_wait ||
+ return io_cqring_events(ctx) >= iowq->to_wait ||
atomic_read(&ctx->cq_timeouts) != iowq->nr_timeouts;
}
@@ -7107,10 +7117,14 @@ static int io_wake_function(struct wait_queue_entry *curr, unsigned int mode,
struct io_wait_queue *iowq = container_of(curr, struct io_wait_queue,
wq);
- /* use noflush == true, as we can't safely rely on locking context */
- if (!io_should_wake(iowq, true))
+ /*
+ * just ensure we wake up the task, and the next invocation will
+ * flush the entries. We cannot safely to it from here.
+ */
+ if (test_bit(0, &ctx->cq_check_overflow))
+ return -1;
+ if (!io_should_wake(iowq))
return -1;
-
return autoremove_wake_function(curr, mode, wake_flags, key);
}
@@ -7148,7 +7162,8 @@ static int io_cqring_wait(struct io_ring_ctx *ctx, int min_events,
int ret = 0;
do {
- if (io_cqring_events(ctx, false) >= min_events)
+ io_cqring_overflow_flush(ctx, false, NULL, NULL);
+ if (io_cqring_events(ctx) >= min_events)
return 0;
if (!io_run_task_work())
break;
@@ -7184,8 +7199,16 @@ static int io_cqring_wait(struct io_ring_ctx *ctx, int min_events,
continue;
else if (ret < 0)
break;
- if (io_should_wake(&iowq, false))
+
+ /* iopoll ignores completion_lock, so not safe to flush */
+ if (io_should_wake(&iowq))
break;
+ if (test_bit(0, &ctx->cq_check_overflow)) {
+ finish_wait(&ctx->wait, &iowq.wq);
+ io_cqring_overflow_flush(ctx, false, NULL, NULL);
+ continue;
+ }
+
if (uts) {
timeout = schedule_timeout(timeout);
if (timeout == 0) {
@@ -8623,7 +8646,8 @@ static __poll_t io_uring_poll(struct file *file, poll_table *wait)
smp_rmb();
if (!io_sqring_full(ctx))
mask |= EPOLLOUT | EPOLLWRNORM;
- if (io_cqring_events(ctx, false))
+ io_cqring_overflow_flush(ctx, false, NULL, NULL);
+ if (io_cqring_events(ctx))
mask |= EPOLLIN | EPOLLRDNORM;
return mask;
@@ -8681,7 +8705,7 @@ static void io_ring_ctx_wait_and_kill(struct io_ring_ctx *ctx)
/* if force is set, the ring is going away. always drop after that */
ctx->cq_overflow_flushed = 1;
if (ctx->rings)
- io_cqring_overflow_flush(ctx, true, NULL, NULL);
+ __io_cqring_overflow_flush(ctx, true, NULL, NULL);
mutex_unlock(&ctx->uring_lock);
io_kill_timeouts(ctx, NULL, NULL);
@@ -8855,9 +8879,7 @@ static void io_uring_cancel_task_requests(struct io_ring_ctx *ctx,
}
io_cancel_defer_files(ctx, task, files);
- io_ring_submit_lock(ctx, (ctx->flags & IORING_SETUP_IOPOLL));
io_cqring_overflow_flush(ctx, true, task, files);
- io_ring_submit_unlock(ctx, (ctx->flags & IORING_SETUP_IOPOLL));
if (!files)
__io_uring_cancel_task_requests(ctx, task);
@@ -9193,13 +9215,8 @@ SYSCALL_DEFINE6(io_uring_enter, unsigned int, fd, u32, to_submit,
*/
ret = 0;
if (ctx->flags & IORING_SETUP_SQPOLL) {
- if (!list_empty_careful(&ctx->cq_overflow_list)) {
- bool needs_lock = ctx->flags & IORING_SETUP_IOPOLL;
+ io_cqring_overflow_flush(ctx, false, NULL, NULL);
- io_ring_submit_lock(ctx, needs_lock);
- io_cqring_overflow_flush(ctx, false, NULL, NULL);
- io_ring_submit_unlock(ctx, needs_lock);
- }
if (flags & IORING_ENTER_SQ_WAKEUP)
wake_up(&ctx->sq_data->wait);
if (flags & IORING_ENTER_SQ_WAIT)
--
2.24.0
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2021-01-03 16:33 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 9+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2021-01-02 16:06 [PATCH 0/4] bunch of random fixes Pavel Begunkov
2021-01-02 16:06 ` [PATCH 1/4] io_uring: dont kill fasync under completion_lock Pavel Begunkov
2021-01-03 11:58 ` Pavel Begunkov
2021-01-02 16:06 ` [PATCH 2/4] io_uring: patch up IOPOLL overflow_flush sync Pavel Begunkov
2021-01-03 15:12 ` Jens Axboe
2021-01-03 16:29 ` Pavel Begunkov [this message]
2021-01-03 22:05 ` Jens Axboe
2021-01-02 16:06 ` [PATCH 3/4] io_uring: drop file refs after task cancel Pavel Begunkov
2021-01-02 16:06 ` [PATCH 4/4] io_uring: cancel more aggressively in exit_work Pavel Begunkov
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 \
[email protected] \
[email protected] \
[email protected] \
[email protected] \
/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