public inbox for [email protected]
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
* [PATCH 1/1] io_uring: fix io_queue_proc modifying req->flags
@ 2024-03-07 18:06 Pavel Begunkov
  2024-03-07 18:48 ` Jens Axboe
  0 siblings, 1 reply; 2+ messages in thread
From: Pavel Begunkov @ 2024-03-07 18:06 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: io-uring; +Cc: Jens Axboe, asml.silence

With multiple poll entries __io_queue_proc() might be running in
parallel with poll handlers and possibly task_work, we should not be
carelessly modifying req->flags there. io_poll_double_prepare() handles
a similar case with locking but it's much easier to move it into
__io_arm_poll_handler().

Cc: [email protected]
Fixes: 595e52284d24a ("io_uring/poll: don't enable lazy wake for POLLEXCLUSIVE")
Signed-off-by: Pavel Begunkov <[email protected]>
---
 io_uring/poll.c | 19 +++++++++++--------
 1 file changed, 11 insertions(+), 8 deletions(-)

diff --git a/io_uring/poll.c b/io_uring/poll.c
index 053d738c330c..5f779139cae1 100644
--- a/io_uring/poll.c
+++ b/io_uring/poll.c
@@ -540,14 +540,6 @@ static void __io_queue_proc(struct io_poll *poll, struct io_poll_table *pt,
 	poll->wait.private = (void *) wqe_private;
 
 	if (poll->events & EPOLLEXCLUSIVE) {
-		/*
-		 * Exclusive waits may only wake a limited amount of entries
-		 * rather than all of them, this may interfere with lazy
-		 * wake if someone does wait(events > 1). Ensure we don't do
-		 * lazy wake for those, as we need to process each one as they
-		 * come in.
-		 */
-		req->flags |= REQ_F_POLL_NO_LAZY;
 		add_wait_queue_exclusive(head, &poll->wait);
 	} else {
 		add_wait_queue(head, &poll->wait);
@@ -616,6 +608,17 @@ static int __io_arm_poll_handler(struct io_kiocb *req,
 	if (issue_flags & IO_URING_F_UNLOCKED)
 		req->flags &= ~REQ_F_HASH_LOCKED;
 
+
+	/*
+	 * Exclusive waits may only wake a limited amount of entries
+	 * rather than all of them, this may interfere with lazy
+	 * wake if someone does wait(events > 1). Ensure we don't do
+	 * lazy wake for those, as we need to process each one as they
+	 * come in.
+	 */
+	if (poll->events & EPOLLEXCLUSIVE)
+		req->flags |= REQ_F_POLL_NO_LAZY;
+
 	mask = vfs_poll(req->file, &ipt->pt) & poll->events;
 
 	if (unlikely(ipt->error || !ipt->nr_entries)) {
-- 
2.43.0


^ permalink raw reply related	[flat|nested] 2+ messages in thread

* Re: [PATCH 1/1] io_uring: fix io_queue_proc modifying req->flags
  2024-03-07 18:06 [PATCH 1/1] io_uring: fix io_queue_proc modifying req->flags Pavel Begunkov
@ 2024-03-07 18:48 ` Jens Axboe
  0 siblings, 0 replies; 2+ messages in thread
From: Jens Axboe @ 2024-03-07 18:48 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: io-uring, Pavel Begunkov


On Thu, 07 Mar 2024 18:06:32 +0000, Pavel Begunkov wrote:
> With multiple poll entries __io_queue_proc() might be running in
> parallel with poll handlers and possibly task_work, we should not be
> carelessly modifying req->flags there. io_poll_double_prepare() handles
> a similar case with locking but it's much easier to move it into
> __io_arm_poll_handler().
> 
> 
> [...]

Applied, thanks!

[1/1] io_uring: fix io_queue_proc modifying req->flags
      commit: 1a8ec63b2b6c91caec87d4e132b1f71b5df342be

Best regards,
-- 
Jens Axboe




^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 2+ messages in thread

end of thread, other threads:[~2024-03-07 18:48 UTC | newest]

Thread overview: 2+ messages (download: mbox.gz follow: Atom feed
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2024-03-07 18:06 [PATCH 1/1] io_uring: fix io_queue_proc modifying req->flags Pavel Begunkov
2024-03-07 18:48 ` Jens Axboe

This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox