From: Jan Kara <jack@suse.cz>
To: Nick Piggin <npiggin@gmail.com>
Cc: Jeff Moyer <jmoyer@redhat.com>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
linux-fsdevel <linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [patch] fs: aio fix rcu lookup
Date: Tue, 18 Jan 2011 20:01:14 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20110118190114.GA5070@quack.suse.cz> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <AANLkTikgsGHJ+q6=We_zPAivyABq+z2f6Atv6ZScLYOU@mail.gmail.com>
Hi,
On Tue 18-01-11 10:24:24, Nick Piggin wrote:
> On Tue, Jan 18, 2011 at 6:07 AM, Jeff Moyer <jmoyer@redhat.com> wrote:
> > Nick Piggin <npiggin@gmail.com> writes:
> >> Do you agree with the theoretical problem? I didn't try to
> >> write a racer to break it yet. Inserting a delay before the
> >> get_ioctx might do the trick.
> >
> > I'm not convinced, no. The last reference to the kioctx is always the
> > process, released in the exit_aio path, or via sys_io_destroy. In both
> > cases, we cancel all aios, then wait for them all to complete before
> > dropping the final reference to the context.
>
> That wouldn't appear to prevent a concurrent thread from doing an
> io operation that requires ioctx lookup, and taking the last reference
> after the io_cancel thread drops the ref.
>
> > So, while I agree that what you wrote is better, I remain unconvinced of
> > it solving a real-world problem. Feel free to push it in as a cleanup,
> > though.
>
> Well I think it has to be technically correct first. If there is indeed a
> guaranteed ref somehow, it just needs a comment.
Hmm, the code in io_destroy() indeed looks fishy. We delete the ioctx
from the hash table and set ioctx->dead which is supposed to stop
lookup_ioctx() from finding it (see the !ctx->dead check in
lookup_ioctx()). There's even a comment in io_destroy() saying:
/*
* Wake up any waiters. The setting of ctx->dead must be seen
* by other CPUs at this point. Right now, we rely on the
* locking done by the above calls to ensure this consistency.
*/
But since lookup_ioctx() is called without any lock or barrier nothing
really seems to prevent the list traversal and ioctx->dead test to happen
before io_destroy() and get_ioctx() after io_destroy().
But wouldn't the right fix be to call synchronize_rcu() in io_destroy()?
Because with your fix we could still return 'dead' ioctx and I don't think
we are supposed to do that...
Honza
--
Jan Kara <jack@suse.cz>
SUSE Labs, CR
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2011-01-18 19:01 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 32+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2011-01-14 1:35 [patch] fs: aio fix rcu lookup Nick Piggin
2011-01-14 14:52 ` Jeff Moyer
2011-01-14 15:00 ` Nick Piggin
2011-01-17 19:07 ` Jeff Moyer
2011-01-17 23:24 ` Nick Piggin
2011-01-18 17:21 ` Jeff Moyer
2011-01-18 19:01 ` Jan Kara [this message]
2011-01-18 22:17 ` Nick Piggin
2011-01-18 23:00 ` Jeff Moyer
2011-01-18 23:05 ` Nick Piggin
2011-01-18 23:52 ` Jan Kara
2011-01-19 0:20 ` Nick Piggin
2011-01-19 13:21 ` Jan Kara
2011-01-19 16:03 ` Nick Piggin
2011-01-19 16:50 ` Jan Kara
2011-01-19 17:37 ` Nick Piggin
2011-01-20 20:21 ` Jan Kara
2011-01-19 19:13 ` Jeff Moyer
2011-01-19 19:46 ` Jeff Moyer
2011-01-19 20:18 ` Nick Piggin
2011-01-19 20:32 ` Jeff Moyer
2011-01-19 20:45 ` Nick Piggin
2011-01-19 21:03 ` Jeff Moyer
2011-01-19 21:20 ` Nick Piggin
2011-01-20 4:03 ` Paul E. McKenney
2011-01-20 18:31 ` Nick Piggin
2011-01-20 20:02 ` Paul E. McKenney
2011-01-20 20:15 ` Eric Dumazet
2011-01-21 21:22 ` Paul E. McKenney
2011-01-20 20:16 ` Jan Kara
2011-01-20 21:16 ` Jeff Moyer
2011-02-01 16:24 ` Jan Kara
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=20110118190114.GA5070@quack.suse.cz \
--to=jack@suse.cz \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=jmoyer@redhat.com \
--cc=linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=npiggin@gmail.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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).