From: Jens Axboe <[email protected]>
To: io-uring <[email protected]>
Cc: Jan Hendrik Farr <[email protected]>
Subject: [PATCH v2] io_uring: check for presence of task_work rather than TIF_NOTIFY_SIGNAL
Date: Thu, 19 Sep 2024 12:03:10 -0600 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <[email protected]> (raw)
If some part of the kernel adds task_work that needs executing, in terms
of signaling it'll generally use TWA_SIGNAL or TWA_RESUME. Those two
directly translate to TIF_NOTIFY_SIGNAL or TIF_NOTIFY_RESUME, and can
be used for a variety of use case outside of task_work.
However, io_cqring_wait_schedule() only tests explicitly for
TIF_NOTIFY_SIGNAL. This means it can miss if task_work got added for
the task, but used a different kind of signaling mechanism (or none at
all). Normally this doesn't matter as any task_work will be run once
the task exits to userspace, except if:
1) The ring is setup with DEFER_TASKRUN
2) The local work item may generate normal task_work
For condition 2, this can happen when closing a file and it's the final
put of that file, for example. This can cause stalls where a task is
waiting to make progress inside io_cqring_wait(), but there's nothing else
that will wake it up. Hence change the "should we schedule or loop around"
check to check for the presence of task_work explicitly, rather than just
TIF_NOTIFY_SIGNAL as the mechanism. While in there, also change the
ordering of what type of task_work first in terms of ordering, to both
make it consistent with other task_work runs in io_uring, but also to
better handle the case of defer task_work generating normal task_work,
like in the above example.
Reported-by: Jan Hendrik Farr <[email protected]>
Link: https://github.com/axboe/liburing/issues/1235
Cc: [email protected]
Fixes: 846072f16eed ("io_uring: mimimise io_cqring_wait_schedule")
Signed-off-by: Jens Axboe <[email protected]>
---
V2:
- Improve commit message
- In addition to re-ordering the task_work type runs, change
the io_cqring_wait_schedule() check to explicitly check
for the presence of task_work rather than the notification
method.
diff --git a/io_uring/io_uring.c b/io_uring/io_uring.c
index 1aca501efaf6..11c455b638a2 100644
--- a/io_uring/io_uring.c
+++ b/io_uring/io_uring.c
@@ -2461,7 +2461,7 @@ static inline int io_cqring_wait_schedule(struct io_ring_ctx *ctx,
return 1;
if (unlikely(!llist_empty(&ctx->work_llist)))
return 1;
- if (unlikely(test_thread_flag(TIF_NOTIFY_SIGNAL)))
+ if (unlikely(task_work_pending(current)))
return 1;
if (unlikely(task_sigpending(current)))
return -EINTR;
@@ -2568,9 +2568,9 @@ static int io_cqring_wait(struct io_ring_ctx *ctx, int min_events, u32 flags,
* If we got woken because of task_work being processed, run it
* now rather than let the caller do another wait loop.
*/
- io_run_task_work();
if (!llist_empty(&ctx->work_llist))
io_run_local_work(ctx, nr_wait);
+ io_run_task_work();
/*
* Non-local task_work will be run on exit to userspace, but
--
Jens Axboe
reply other threads:[~2024-09-19 18:03 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: [no followups] expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed
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