From: David Laight <David.Laight@ACULAB.COM>
To: 'Jason Baron' <jbaron@akamai.com>,
"akpm@linux-foundation.org" <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Cc: "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
"Alexander Viro" <viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk>, Heiher <r@hev.cc>,
Roman Penyaev <rpenyaev@suse.de>,
Khazhismel Kumykov <khazhy@google.com>,
Davidlohr Bueso <dbueso@suse.de>,
"stable@vger.kernel.org" <stable@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: RE: [PATCH] epoll: ensure ep_poll() doesn't miss wakeup events
Date: Sun, 3 May 2020 13:05:24 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <c2921e66bf3a4edfaa667c32abbefebf@AcuMS.aculab.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1588360533-11828-1-git-send-email-jbaron@akamai.com>
From: Jason Baron
> Sent: 01 May 2020 20:16
>
> Now that the ep_events_available() check is done in a lockless way, and
> we no longer perform wakeups from ep_scan_ready_list(), we need to ensure
> that either ep->rdllist has items or the overflow list is active. Prior to:
> commit 339ddb53d373 ("fs/epoll: remove unnecessary wakeups of nested
> epoll"), we did wake_up(&ep->wq) after manipulating the ep->rdllist and the
> overflow list. Thus, any waiters would observe the correct state. However,
> with that wake_up() now removed we need to be more careful to ensure that
> condition.
I'm wondering how much all this affects the (probably) more common
case of a process reading events from a lot of sockets in 'level'
mode.
Even the change to a rwlock() may have had an adverse effect
on such programs.
In 'level' mode it doesn't make any sense to have multiple
readers of the event queue.
David
-
Registered Address Lakeside, Bramley Road, Mount Farm, Milton Keynes, MK1 1PT, UK
Registration No: 1397386 (Wales)
prev parent reply other threads:[~2020-05-03 13:05 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 8+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2020-05-01 19:15 [PATCH] epoll: ensure ep_poll() doesn't miss wakeup events Jason Baron
2020-05-01 21:02 ` Roman Penyaev
2020-05-01 22:09 ` Jason Baron
2020-05-03 10:24 ` Roman Penyaev
2020-05-04 4:29 ` Jason Baron
2020-05-04 4:59 ` Jason Baron
2020-05-04 9:40 ` Roman Penyaev
2020-05-03 13:05 ` David Laight [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=c2921e66bf3a4edfaa667c32abbefebf@AcuMS.aculab.com \
--to=david.laight@aculab.com \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=dbueso@suse.de \
--cc=jbaron@akamai.com \
--cc=khazhy@google.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=r@hev.cc \
--cc=rpenyaev@suse.de \
--cc=stable@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk \
/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