From: Jens Axboe <[email protected]>
To: Bijan Mottahedeh <[email protected]>
Cc: io-uring <[email protected]>
Subject: Re: Does need memory barrier to synchronize req->result with req->iopoll_completed
Date: Tue, 16 Jun 2020 13:35:06 -0600 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <[email protected]> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <[email protected]>
On 6/16/20 11:31 AM, Bijan Mottahedeh wrote:
> On 6/14/2020 8:36 AM, Jens Axboe wrote:
>> On 6/14/20 8:10 AM, Xiaoguang Wang wrote:
>>> hi,
>>>
>>> I have taken some further thoughts about previous IPOLL race fix patch,
>>> if io_complete_rw_iopoll() is called in interrupt context, "req->result = res"
>>> and "WRITE_ONCE(req->iopoll_completed, 1);" are independent store operations.
>>> So in io_do_iopoll(), if iopoll_completed is ture, can we make sure that
>>> req->result has already been perceived by the cpu executing io_do_iopoll()?
>> Good point, I think if we do something like the below, we should be
>> totally safe against an IRQ completion. Since we batch the completions,
>> we can get by with just a single smp_rmb() on the completion side.
>>
>> diff --git a/fs/io_uring.c b/fs/io_uring.c
>> index 155f3d830ddb..74c2a4709b63 100644
>> --- a/fs/io_uring.c
>> +++ b/fs/io_uring.c
>> @@ -1736,6 +1736,9 @@ static void io_iopoll_complete(struct io_ring_ctx *ctx, unsigned int *nr_events,
>> struct req_batch rb;
>> struct io_kiocb *req;
>>
>> + /* order with ->result store in io_complete_rw_iopoll() */
>> + smp_rmb();
>> +
>> rb.to_free = rb.need_iter = 0;
>> while (!list_empty(done)) {
>> int cflags = 0;
>> @@ -1976,6 +1979,8 @@ static void io_complete_rw_iopoll(struct kiocb *kiocb, long res, long res2)
>> if (res != req->result)
>> req_set_fail_links(req);
>> req->result = res;
>> + /* order with io_poll_complete() checking ->result */
>> + smp_wmb();
>> if (res != -EAGAIN)
>> WRITE_ONCE(req->iopoll_completed, 1);
>> }
>>
> I'm just trying to understand how the above smp_rmb() works. When
> io_complete_rw_iopoll() is called, all requests on the done list have
> already had ->iopoll_completed checked, and given the smp_wmb(),we know
> the two writes were ordered, so what does the smp_rmb() achieve here
> exactly? What ordering does it perform?
Documentation/memory-barriers.txt actually has a good example of that,
skip to line 2219 or so.
--
Jens Axboe
prev parent reply other threads:[~2020-06-16 19:35 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 5+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2020-06-14 14:10 Does need memory barrier to synchronize req->result with req->iopoll_completed Xiaoguang Wang
2020-06-14 15:36 ` Jens Axboe
2020-06-15 2:10 ` Xiaoguang Wang
2020-06-16 17:31 ` Bijan Mottahedeh
2020-06-16 19:35 ` Jens Axboe [this message]
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