From: Pavel Begunkov <asml.silence@gmail.com>
To: Bernd Schubert <bschubert@ddn.com>, Ming Lei <ming.lei@redhat.com>
Cc: Miklos Szeredi <miklos@szeredi.hu>, Jens Axboe <axboe@kernel.dk>,
"linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org>,
"io-uring@vger.kernel.org" <io-uring@vger.kernel.org>,
Joanne Koong <joannelkoong@gmail.com>,
Amir Goldstein <amir73il@gmail.com>,
Ming Lei <tom.leiming@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH RFC v4 12/15] io_uring/cmd: let cmds to know about dying task
Date: Thu, 7 Nov 2024 16:11:20 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <56de1181-b37d-4952-9b2f-0565c6f53ab8@gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <c85045a5-0865-45d2-b561-d6b1cfb75c38@ddn.com>
On 11/6/24 19:34, Bernd Schubert wrote:
> On 11/6/24 05:44, Ming Lei wrote:
>> On Wed, Nov 6, 2024 at 7:02 AM Bernd Schubert <bschubert@ddn.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On 11/5/24 02:08, Pavel Begunkov wrote:
>>>>
>>>> FWIW, the original version is how it's handled in several places
>>>> across io_uring, and the difference is a gap for !DEFER_TASKRUN
>>>> when a task_work is queued somewhere in between when a task is
>>>> started going through exit() but haven't got PF_EXITING set yet.
>>>> IOW, should be harder to hit.
>>>>
>>>
>>> Does that mean that the test for PF_EXITING is racy and we cannot
>>> entirely rely on it?
>>
>> Another solution is to mark uring_cmd as io_uring_cmd_mark_cancelable(),
>> which provides a chance to cancel cmd in the current context.
In short, F_CANCEL not going to help, unfortunately.
The F_CANCEL path can and likely to be triggered from a kthread instead
of the original task. See call sites of io_uring_try_cancel_requests(),
where the task termination/exit path, i.e. io_uring_cancel_generic(), in
most cases will skip the call bc of the tctx_inflight() check.
Also, io_uring doesn't try to cancel queued task_work (the callback
is supposed to check if it need to fail the request), so if someone
queued up a task_work including via __io_uring_cmd_do_in_task() and
friends, even F_CANCEL won't be able to cancel it.
> Yeah, I have that, see
> [PATCH RFC v4 14/15] fuse: {io-uring} Prevent mount point hang on fuse-server termination
>
> As I just wrote to Pavel, getting IO_URING_F_TASK_DEAD is rather hard
> in my current branch.IO_URING_F_CANCEL didn't make a difference ,
> I had especially tried to disable it - still neither
> IO_URING_F_TASK_DEAD nor the crash got easily triggered. So I
> reenabled IO_URING_F_CANCEL and then eventually
> got IO_URING_F_TASK_DEAD - i.e. without checking the underlying code,
> looks like we need both for safety measures.
--
Pavel Begunkov
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2024-11-07 16:11 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 47+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2024-10-16 0:05 [PATCH RFC v4 00/15] fuse: fuse-over-io-uring Bernd Schubert
2024-10-16 0:05 ` [PATCH RFC v4 01/15] fuse: rename to fuse_dev_end_requests and make non-static Bernd Schubert
2024-10-16 0:05 ` [PATCH RFC v4 02/15] fuse: Move fuse_get_dev to header file Bernd Schubert
2024-10-16 0:05 ` [PATCH RFC v4 03/15] fuse: Move request bits Bernd Schubert
2024-10-16 0:05 ` [PATCH RFC v4 04/15] fuse: Add fuse-io-uring design documentation Bernd Schubert
2024-10-16 0:05 ` [PATCH RFC v4 05/15] fuse: {uring} Handle SQEs - register commands Bernd Schubert
2024-10-16 0:05 ` [PATCH RFC v4 06/15] fuse: Make fuse_copy non static Bernd Schubert
2024-10-16 0:05 ` [PATCH RFC v4 07/15] fuse: Add buffer offset for uring into fuse_copy_state Bernd Schubert
2024-10-16 0:05 ` [PATCH RFC v4 08/15] fuse: {uring} Add uring sqe commit and fetch support Bernd Schubert
2024-10-16 0:05 ` [PATCH RFC v4 09/15] fuse: {uring} Handle teardown of ring entries Bernd Schubert
2024-10-16 0:05 ` [PATCH RFC v4 10/15] fuse: {uring} Add a ring queue and send method Bernd Schubert
2024-10-16 0:05 ` [PATCH RFC v4 11/15] fuse: {uring} Allow to queue to the ring Bernd Schubert
2024-10-16 0:05 ` [PATCH RFC v4 12/15] io_uring/cmd: let cmds to know about dying task Bernd Schubert
2024-11-04 0:28 ` Pavel Begunkov
2024-11-04 22:15 ` Bernd Schubert
2024-11-05 1:08 ` Pavel Begunkov
2024-11-05 23:02 ` Bernd Schubert
2024-11-06 0:14 ` Pavel Begunkov
2024-11-06 19:28 ` Bernd Schubert
2024-11-06 4:44 ` Ming Lei
2024-11-06 19:34 ` Bernd Schubert
2024-11-07 16:11 ` Pavel Begunkov [this message]
2024-10-16 0:05 ` [PATCH RFC v4 13/15] fuse: {uring} Handle IO_URING_F_TASK_DEAD Bernd Schubert
2024-10-16 0:05 ` [PATCH RFC v4 14/15] fuse: {io-uring} Prevent mount point hang on fuse-server termination Bernd Schubert
2024-10-16 0:05 ` [PATCH RFC v4 15/15] fuse: enable fuse-over-io-uring Bernd Schubert
2024-10-16 0:08 ` [PATCH RFC v4 00/15] fuse: fuse-over-io-uring Bernd Schubert
2024-10-21 4:06 ` David Wei
2024-10-21 11:47 ` Bernd Schubert
2024-10-21 20:57 ` David Wei
2024-10-22 10:24 ` Bernd Schubert
2024-10-22 12:46 ` Bernd Schubert
2024-10-22 17:10 ` David Wei
2024-10-22 17:12 ` David Wei
2024-10-22 22:10 ` David Wei
2024-11-04 8:24 ` Bernd Schubert
2024-11-04 23:02 ` Bernd Schubert
[not found] ` <CGME20250618105918epcas5p472b61890ece3e8044e7172785f469cc0@epcas5p4.samsung.com>
2025-06-18 10:54 ` [PATCH v9 00/17] " xiaobing.li
2025-06-18 13:13 ` Bernd Schubert
2025-06-18 15:30 ` Keith Busch
2025-06-18 15:40 ` Pavel Begunkov
[not found] ` <CGME20250620014432epcas5p30841af52f56e49e557caef01f9e29e52@epcas5p3.samsung.com>
2025-06-20 1:39 ` xiaobing.li
2025-06-23 21:36 ` Bernd Schubert
2025-06-23 21:55 ` David Wei
2025-06-23 22:21 ` Bernd Schubert
[not found] ` <CGME20250814020034epcas5p47c78b2cf41ab9776a2eb5a4face4ff77@epcas5p4.samsung.com>
2025-08-14 1:55 ` Xue He
2025-06-24 1:09 ` Ming Lei
[not found] ` <CGME20250623083812epcas5p2f7487b16f6a354b42e47b15d874bfbea@epcas5p2.samsung.com>
2025-06-23 8:33 ` xiaobing.li
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=56de1181-b37d-4952-9b2f-0565c6f53ab8@gmail.com \
--to=asml.silence@gmail.com \
--cc=amir73il@gmail.com \
--cc=axboe@kernel.dk \
--cc=bschubert@ddn.com \
--cc=io-uring@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=joannelkoong@gmail.com \
--cc=linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=miklos@szeredi.hu \
--cc=ming.lei@redhat.com \
--cc=tom.leiming@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).