From: Pavel Begunkov <[email protected]>
To: Jens Axboe <[email protected]>, Bernd Schubert <[email protected]>,
Bernd Schubert <[email protected]>,
Miklos Szeredi <[email protected]>
Cc: Amir Goldstein <[email protected]>,
"[email protected]" <[email protected]>,
"[email protected]" <[email protected]>,
Kent Overstreet <[email protected]>,
Josef Bacik <[email protected]>,
Joanne Koong <[email protected]>
Subject: Re: [PATCH RFC v2 00/19] fuse: fuse-over-io-uring
Date: Fri, 30 Aug 2024 15:55:07 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <[email protected]> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <[email protected]>
On 8/30/24 14:33, Jens Axboe wrote:
> On 8/30/24 7:28 AM, Bernd Schubert wrote:
>> On 8/30/24 15:12, Jens Axboe wrote:
>>> On 8/29/24 4:32 PM, Bernd Schubert wrote:
>>>> We probably need to call iov_iter_get_pages2() immediately
>>>> on submitting the buffer from fuse server and not only when needed.
>>>> I had planned to do that as optimization later on, I think
>>>> it is also needed to avoid io_uring_cmd_complete_in_task().
>>>
>>> I think you do, but it's not really what's wrong here - fallback work is
>>> being invoked as the ring is being torn down, either directly or because
>>> the task is exiting. Your task_work should check if this is the case,
>>> and just do -ECANCELED for this case rather than attempt to execute the
>>> work. Most task_work doesn't do much outside of post a completion, but
>>> yours seems complex in that attempts to map pages as well, for example.
>>> In any case, regardless of whether you move the gup to the actual issue
>>> side of things (which I think you should), then you'd want something
>>> ala:
>>>
>>> if (req->task != current)
>>> don't issue, -ECANCELED
>>>
>>> in your task_work.nvme_uring_task_cb
>>
>> Thanks a lot for your help Jens! I'm a bit confused, doesn't this belong
>> into __io_uring_cmd_do_in_task then? Because my task_work_cb function
>> (passed to io_uring_cmd_complete_in_task) doesn't even have the request.
>
> Yeah it probably does, the uring_cmd case is a bit special is that it's
> a set of helpers around task_work that can be consumed by eg fuse and
> ublk. The existing users don't really do anything complicated on that
> side, hence there's no real need to check. But since the ring/task is
> going away, we should be able to generically do it in the helpers like
> you did below.
That won't work, we should give commands an opportunity to clean up
after themselves. I'm pretty sure it will break existing users.
For now we can pass a flag to the callback, fuse would need to
check it and fail. Compile tested only
commit a5b382f150b44476ccfa84cefdb22ce2ceeb12f1
Author: Pavel Begunkov <[email protected]>
Date: Fri Aug 30 15:43:32 2024 +0100
io_uring/cmd: let cmds tw know about dying task
When the taks that submitted a request is dying, a task work for that
request might get run by a kernel thread or even worse by a half
dismantled task. We can't just cancel the task work without running the
callback as the cmd might need to do some clean up, so pass a flag
instead. If set, it's not safe to access any task resources and the
callback is expected to cancel the cmd ASAP.
Signed-off-by: Pavel Begunkov <[email protected]>
diff --git a/include/linux/io_uring_types.h b/include/linux/io_uring_types.h
index ace7ac056d51..a89abec98832 100644
--- a/include/linux/io_uring_types.h
+++ b/include/linux/io_uring_types.h
@@ -37,6 +37,7 @@ enum io_uring_cmd_flags {
/* set when uring wants to cancel a previously issued command */
IO_URING_F_CANCEL = (1 << 11),
IO_URING_F_COMPAT = (1 << 12),
+ IO_URING_F_TASK_DEAD = (1 << 13),
};
struct io_zcrx_ifq;
diff --git a/io_uring/uring_cmd.c b/io_uring/uring_cmd.c
index 8391c7c7c1ec..55bdcb4b63b3 100644
--- a/io_uring/uring_cmd.c
+++ b/io_uring/uring_cmd.c
@@ -119,9 +119,13 @@ EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(io_uring_cmd_mark_cancelable);
static void io_uring_cmd_work(struct io_kiocb *req, struct io_tw_state *ts)
{
struct io_uring_cmd *ioucmd = io_kiocb_to_cmd(req, struct io_uring_cmd);
+ unsigned flags = IO_URING_F_COMPLETE_DEFER;
+
+ if (req->task->flags & PF_EXITING)
+ flags |= IO_URING_F_TASK_DEAD;
/* task_work executor checks the deffered list completion */
- ioucmd->task_work_cb(ioucmd, IO_URING_F_COMPLETE_DEFER);
+ ioucmd->task_work_cb(ioucmd, flags);
}
void __io_uring_cmd_do_in_task(struct io_uring_cmd *ioucmd,
--
Pavel Begunkov
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2024-08-30 14:54 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 56+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2024-05-29 18:00 [PATCH RFC v2 00/19] fuse: fuse-over-io-uring Bernd Schubert
2024-05-29 18:00 ` [PATCH RFC v2 19/19] fuse: {uring} Optimize async sends Bernd Schubert
2024-05-31 16:24 ` Jens Axboe
2024-05-31 17:36 ` Bernd Schubert
2024-05-31 19:10 ` Jens Axboe
2024-06-01 16:37 ` Bernd Schubert
2024-05-30 7:07 ` [PATCH RFC v2 00/19] fuse: fuse-over-io-uring Amir Goldstein
2024-05-30 12:09 ` Bernd Schubert
2024-05-30 15:36 ` Kent Overstreet
2024-05-30 16:02 ` Bernd Schubert
2024-05-30 16:10 ` Kent Overstreet
2024-05-30 16:17 ` Bernd Schubert
2024-05-30 17:30 ` Kent Overstreet
2024-05-30 19:09 ` Josef Bacik
2024-05-30 20:05 ` Kent Overstreet
2024-05-31 3:53 ` [PATCH] fs: sys_ringbuffer() (WIP) Kent Overstreet
2024-05-31 13:11 ` kernel test robot
2024-05-31 15:49 ` kernel test robot
2024-05-30 16:21 ` [PATCH RFC v2 00/19] fuse: fuse-over-io-uring Jens Axboe
2024-05-30 16:32 ` Bernd Schubert
2024-05-30 17:26 ` Jens Axboe
2024-05-30 17:16 ` Kent Overstreet
2024-05-30 17:28 ` Jens Axboe
2024-05-30 17:58 ` Kent Overstreet
2024-05-30 18:48 ` Jens Axboe
2024-05-30 19:35 ` Kent Overstreet
2024-05-31 0:11 ` Jens Axboe
2024-06-04 23:45 ` Ming Lei
2024-05-30 20:47 ` Josef Bacik
2024-06-11 8:20 ` Miklos Szeredi
2024-06-11 10:26 ` Bernd Schubert
2024-06-11 15:35 ` Miklos Szeredi
2024-06-11 17:37 ` Bernd Schubert
2024-06-11 23:35 ` Kent Overstreet
2024-06-12 13:53 ` Bernd Schubert
2024-06-12 14:19 ` Kent Overstreet
2024-06-12 15:40 ` Bernd Schubert
2024-06-12 15:55 ` Kent Overstreet
2024-06-12 16:15 ` Bernd Schubert
2024-06-12 16:24 ` Kent Overstreet
2024-06-12 16:44 ` Bernd Schubert
2024-06-12 7:39 ` Miklos Szeredi
2024-06-12 13:32 ` Bernd Schubert
2024-06-12 13:46 ` Bernd Schubert
2024-06-12 14:07 ` Miklos Szeredi
2024-06-12 14:56 ` Bernd Schubert
2024-08-02 23:03 ` Bernd Schubert
2024-08-29 22:32 ` Bernd Schubert
2024-08-30 13:12 ` Jens Axboe
2024-08-30 13:28 ` Bernd Schubert
2024-08-30 13:33 ` Jens Axboe
2024-08-30 14:55 ` Pavel Begunkov [this message]
2024-08-30 15:10 ` Bernd Schubert
2024-08-30 20:08 ` Jens Axboe
2024-08-31 0:02 ` Bernd Schubert
2024-08-31 0:49 ` Bernd Schubert
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] \
[email protected] \
[email protected] \
[email protected] \
[email protected] \
[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