From: Pavel Begunkov <[email protected]>
To: [email protected]
Cc: Jens Axboe <[email protected]>,
[email protected], Lin Ma <[email protected]>
Subject: [PATCH v3 2/2] io_uring: make poll refs more robust
Date: Sun, 20 Nov 2022 16:57:42 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <c762bc31f8683b3270f3587691348a7119ef9c9d.1668963050.git.asml.silence@gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <[email protected]>
poll_refs carry two functions, the first is ownership over the request.
The second is notifying the io_poll_check_events() that there was an
event but wake up couldn't grab the ownership, so io_poll_check_events()
should retry.
We want to make poll_refs more robust against overflows. Instead of
always incrementing it, which covers two purposes with one atomic, check
if poll_refs is elevated enough and if so set a retry flag without
attempts to grab ownership. The gap between the bias check and following
atomics may seem racy, but we don't need it to be strict. Moreover there
might only be maximum 4 parallel updates: by the first and the second
poll entries, __io_arm_poll_handler() and cancellation. From those four,
only poll wake ups may be executed multiple times, but they're protected
by a spin.
Cc: [email protected]
Reported-by: Lin Ma <[email protected]>
Fixes: aa43477b04025 ("io_uring: poll rework")
Signed-off-by: Pavel Begunkov <[email protected]>
---
io_uring/poll.c | 36 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-
1 file changed, 35 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
diff --git a/io_uring/poll.c b/io_uring/poll.c
index 1b78b527075d..b444b7d87697 100644
--- a/io_uring/poll.c
+++ b/io_uring/poll.c
@@ -40,7 +40,14 @@ struct io_poll_table {
};
#define IO_POLL_CANCEL_FLAG BIT(31)
-#define IO_POLL_REF_MASK GENMASK(30, 0)
+#define IO_POLL_RETRY_FLAG BIT(30)
+#define IO_POLL_REF_MASK GENMASK(29, 0)
+
+/*
+ * We usually have 1-2 refs taken, 128 is more than enough and we want to
+ * maximise the margin between this amount and the moment when it overflows.
+ */
+#define IO_POLL_REF_BIAS 128
#define IO_WQE_F_DOUBLE 1
@@ -58,6 +65,21 @@ static inline bool wqe_is_double(struct wait_queue_entry *wqe)
return priv & IO_WQE_F_DOUBLE;
}
+static bool io_poll_get_ownership_slowpath(struct io_kiocb *req)
+{
+ int v;
+
+ /*
+ * poll_refs are already elevated and we don't have much hope for
+ * grabbing the ownership. Instead of incrementing set a retry flag
+ * to notify the loop that there might have been some change.
+ */
+ v = atomic_fetch_or(IO_POLL_RETRY_FLAG, &req->poll_refs);
+ if (v & IO_POLL_REF_MASK)
+ return false;
+ return !(atomic_fetch_inc(&req->poll_refs) & IO_POLL_REF_MASK);
+}
+
/*
* If refs part of ->poll_refs (see IO_POLL_REF_MASK) is 0, it's free. We can
* bump it and acquire ownership. It's disallowed to modify requests while not
@@ -66,6 +88,8 @@ static inline bool wqe_is_double(struct wait_queue_entry *wqe)
*/
static inline bool io_poll_get_ownership(struct io_kiocb *req)
{
+ if (unlikely(atomic_read(&req->poll_refs) >= IO_POLL_REF_BIAS))
+ return io_poll_get_ownership_slowpath(req);
return !(atomic_fetch_inc(&req->poll_refs) & IO_POLL_REF_MASK);
}
@@ -235,6 +259,16 @@ static int io_poll_check_events(struct io_kiocb *req, bool *locked)
*/
if ((v & IO_POLL_REF_MASK) != 1)
req->cqe.res = 0;
+ if (v & IO_POLL_RETRY_FLAG) {
+ req->cqe.res = 0;
+ /*
+ * We won't find new events that came in between
+ * vfs_poll and the ref put unless we clear the flag
+ * in advance.
+ */
+ atomic_andnot(IO_POLL_RETRY_FLAG, &req->poll_refs);
+ v &= ~IO_POLL_RETRY_FLAG;
+ }
/* the mask was stashed in __io_poll_execute */
if (!req->cqe.res) {
--
2.38.1
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2022-11-20 16:58 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 6+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2022-11-20 16:57 [PATCH v3 0/2] poll_refs armoring Pavel Begunkov
2022-11-20 16:57 ` [PATCH v3 1/2] io_uring: cmpxchg for poll arm refs release Pavel Begunkov
2022-11-25 13:51 ` Pavel Begunkov
2022-11-25 13:55 ` Jens Axboe
2022-11-20 16:57 ` Pavel Begunkov [this message]
2022-11-21 17:10 ` [PATCH v3 0/2] poll_refs armoring Jens Axboe
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 \
--in-reply-to=c762bc31f8683b3270f3587691348a7119ef9c9d.1668963050.git.asml.silence@gmail.com \
[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