Re: [PATCH v3 1/3] io_uring/rsrc: rename and export io_lock_two_rings()

[Pavel Begunkov <asml.silence@gmail.com>]

On 10/28/25 14:54, David Wei wrote:
> On 2025-10-27 03:04, Pavel Begunkov wrote:
>> On 10/26/25 17:34, David Wei wrote:
>>> Rename lock_two_rings() to io_lock_two_rings() and export. This will be
>>> used when sharing a src ifq owned by one ring with another ring. During
>>> this process both rings need to be locked in a deterministic order,
>>> similar to the current user io_clone_buffers().
>>
>> unlock();
>> double_lock();
>>
>> It's quite a bad pattern just like any temporary unlocks in the
>> registration path, it gives a lot of space for exploitation.
>>
>> Ideally, it'd be
>>
>> lock(ctx1);
>> zcrx = grab_zcrx(ctx1, id); // with some refcounting inside
>> unlock(ctx1);
>>
>> lock(ctx2);
>> install(ctx2, zcrx);
>> unlock(ctx2);
> 
> Thanks, I've refactored this to lock rings in sequence instead of both
> rings.
> 
>>
>> And as discussed, we need to think about turning it into a temp
>> file, bc of sync, and it's also hard to send an io_uring fd.
>> Though, that'd need moving bits around to avoid refcounting
>> cycles.
>>
> 
> My next version of this adds a refcount to ifq and decouple its lifetime
> from ring ctx as a first step. Could we defer turning ifq into a file as
> a follow up?

The mentioned sync problems is about using a ring bound to another
task. Decoupling of the zcrx object from io_uring instance should
do here as well. Please send out the next version since it sounds
you already have it prepared and we'll take it from there.

-- 
Pavel Begunkov