Linux io-uring development
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Jens Axboe <axboe@kernel.dk>
To: Pavel Begunkov <asml.silence@gmail.com>,
	io-uring <io-uring@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] io_uring/net: fix a multishot termination case for recv
Date: Sun, 29 Sep 2024 19:58:06 -0600	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <8457d4bf-e7ee-4cc8-a69c-c82212c85f5b@kernel.dk> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <0542e045-e5ee-41d3-b44f-5b6f9657f90a@gmail.com>

On 9/29/24 1:25 PM, Pavel Begunkov wrote:
> On 9/28/24 13:40, Jens Axboe wrote:
>> On 9/28/24 6:18 AM, Jens Axboe wrote:
>>> diff --git a/io_uring/net.c b/io_uring/net.c
>>> index f10f5a22d66a..18507658a921 100644
>>> --- a/io_uring/net.c
>>> +++ b/io_uring/net.c
>>> @@ -1133,6 +1133,7 @@ int io_recv(struct io_kiocb *req, unsigned int issue_flags)
>>>       int ret, min_ret = 0;
>>>       bool force_nonblock = issue_flags & IO_URING_F_NONBLOCK;
>>>       size_t len = sr->len;
>>> +    bool mshot_finished;
>>>         if (!(req->flags & REQ_F_POLLED) &&
>>>           (sr->flags & IORING_RECVSEND_POLL_FIRST))
>>> @@ -1187,6 +1188,7 @@ int io_recv(struct io_kiocb *req, unsigned int issue_flags)
>>>           req_set_fail(req);
>>>       }
>>>   +    mshot_finished = ret <= 0;
>>>       if (ret > 0)
>>>           ret += sr->done_io;
>>>       else if (sr->done_io)
>>> @@ -1194,7 +1196,7 @@ int io_recv(struct io_kiocb *req, unsigned int issue_flags)
>>>       else
>>>           io_kbuf_recycle(req, issue_flags);
>>>   -    if (!io_recv_finish(req, &ret, kmsg, ret <= 0, issue_flags))
>>> +    if (!io_recv_finish(req, &ret, kmsg, mshot_finished, issue_flags))
>>>           goto retry_multishot;
>>>         return ret;
>>
>> On second thought, I don't think we can get into this situation -
>> sr->done_io is only ever used for recv if we had to retry after getting
>> some data. And that only happens if MSG_WAITALL is set, which is not
>> legal for multishot and will result in -EINVAL. So don't quite see how
>> we can run into this issue. But I could be missing something...
>>
>> Comments?
> 
> I noticed the chunk months ago, it's definitely a sloppy one, but I
> deemed it not to be an actual problem after trying to exploit it at
> the moment.

Yes, might not be a bad idea to still do the tweak. Not because we can
_currently_ hit it, but because it could be possible in the future and
just get overlooked.

Thanks for confirming :-)

-- 
Jens Axboe

      reply	other threads:[~2024-09-30  1:58 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 4+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2024-09-28 12:18 [PATCH] io_uring/net: fix a multishot termination case for recv Jens Axboe
2024-09-28 12:40 ` Jens Axboe
2024-09-29 19:25   ` Pavel Begunkov
2024-09-30  1:58     ` 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 \
    --in-reply-to=8457d4bf-e7ee-4cc8-a69c-c82212c85f5b@kernel.dk \
    --to=axboe@kernel.dk \
    --cc=asml.silence@gmail.com \
    --cc=io-uring@vger.kernel.org \
    /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