From: Pavel Begunkov <asml.silence@gmail.com>
To: Xiaoguang Wang <xiaoguang.wang@linux.alibaba.com>,
io-uring@vger.kernel.org
Cc: axboe@kernel.dk, joseph.qi@linux.alibaba.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH] io_uring: don't issue reqs in iopoll mode when ctx is dying
Date: Mon, 8 Feb 2021 13:35:07 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <f3081423-bdee-e7e4-e292-aa001f0937d1@gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <3e3cb8da-d925-7ebd-11a0-f9e145861962@linux.alibaba.com>
On 08/02/2021 02:50, Xiaoguang Wang wrote:
>>> The io_identity's count is underflowed. It's because in io_put_identity,
>>> first argument tctx comes from req->task->io_uring, the second argument
>>> comes from the task context that calls io_req_init_async, so the compare
>>> in io_put_identity maybe meaningless. See below case:
>>> task context A issue one polled req, then req->task = A.
>>> task context B do iopoll, above req returns with EAGAIN error.
>>> task context B re-issue req, call io_queue_async_work for req.
>>> req->task->io_uring will set to task context B's identity, or cow new one.
>>> then for above case, in io_put_identity(), the compare is meaningless.
>>>
>>> IIUC, req->task should indicates the initial task context that issues req,
>>> then if it gets EAGAIN error, we'll call io_prep_async_work() in req->task
>>> context, but iopoll reqs seems special, they maybe issued successfully and
>>> got re-issued in other task context because of EAGAIN error.
>>
>> Looks as you say, but the patch doesn't solve the issue completely.
>> 1. We must not do io_queue_async_work() under a different task context,
>> because of it potentially uses a different set of resources. So, I just
>> thought that it would be better to punt it to the right task context
>> via task_work. But...
>>
>> 2. ...iovec import from io_resubmit_prep() might happen after submit ends,
>> i.e. when iovec was freed in userspace. And that's not great at all.
> Yes, agree, that's why I say we neeed to re-consider the io identity codes
> more in commit message :) I'll have a try to prepare a better one.
I'd vote for dragging -AGAIN'ed reqs that don't need io_import_iovec()
through task_work for resubmission, and fail everything else. Not great,
but imho better than always setting async_data.
--
Pavel Begunkov
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2021-02-08 13:39 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 16+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2021-02-06 15:00 [PATCH] io_uring: don't issue reqs in iopoll mode when ctx is dying Xiaoguang Wang
2021-02-07 17:30 ` Pavel Begunkov
2021-02-08 2:50 ` Xiaoguang Wang
2021-02-08 13:35 ` Pavel Begunkov [this message]
2021-02-22 13:23 ` Pavel Begunkov
2021-02-24 2:30 ` Xiaoguang Wang
2021-02-24 2:35 ` Jens Axboe
2021-02-24 2:45 ` Xiaoguang Wang
2021-02-24 2:51 ` Jens Axboe
2021-02-24 9:46 ` Pavel Begunkov
2021-02-24 9:59 ` Pavel Begunkov
2021-02-24 10:33 ` Pavel Begunkov
2021-02-24 9:38 ` Pavel Begunkov
2021-02-24 12:42 ` Hao Xu
2021-02-25 10:55 ` Pavel Begunkov
2021-02-24 3:23 ` Xiaoguang Wang
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=f3081423-bdee-e7e4-e292-aa001f0937d1@gmail.com \
--to=asml.silence@gmail.com \
--cc=axboe@kernel.dk \
--cc=io-uring@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=joseph.qi@linux.alibaba.com \
--cc=xiaoguang.wang@linux.alibaba.com \
/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 an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.