From: Nam Cao <namcao@linutronix.de>
To: Mateusz Guzik <mjguzik@gmail.com>
Cc: Christian Brauner <brauner@kernel.org>,
Soheil Hassas Yeganeh <soheil@google.com>,
Alexander Viro <viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk>, Jan Kara <jack@suse.cz>,
Shuah Khan <shuah@kernel.org>,
Davidlohr Bueso <dave@stgolabs.net>,
Khazhismel Kumykov <khazhy@google.com>,
Willem de Bruijn <willemb@google.com>,
Eric Dumazet <edumazet@google.com>, Jens Axboe <axboe@kernel.dk>,
linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
linux-kselftest@vger.kernel.org, stable@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] eventpoll: Fix epoll_wait() report false negative
Date: Sun, 03 May 2026 15:24:14 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <87cxzc62yp.fsf@yellow.woof> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <xbotidrmois5ygxtqtwqzczkt76wcc7uw5cz5lptda53coaavj@pzvxcpe534cu>
Mateusz Guzik <mjguzik@gmail.com> writes:
> Strictly speaking more error prone than the seq approach, but should be
> faster on weaker-ordered archs thanks to avoided fences.
>
> I'm definitely not going to protest the seqc route.
Linus probably wouldn't be thrilled if I break epoll again, so let's
stay with the simpler seqcount route.
Nam
diff --git a/fs/eventpoll.c b/fs/eventpoll.c
index a3090b446af1..22c3f0186476 100644
--- a/fs/eventpoll.c
+++ b/fs/eventpoll.c
@@ -38,6 +38,7 @@
#include <linux/compat.h>
#include <linux/rculist.h>
#include <linux/capability.h>
+#include <linux/seqlock.h>
#include <net/busy_poll.h>
/*
@@ -190,6 +191,9 @@ struct eventpoll {
/* Lock which protects rdllist and ovflist */
spinlock_t lock;
+ /* Protect switching between rdllist and ovflist */
+ seqcount_spinlock_t seq;
+
/* RB tree root used to store monitored fd structs */
struct rb_root_cached rbr;
@@ -382,8 +386,17 @@ static inline struct epitem *ep_item_from_wait(wait_queue_entry_t *p)
*/
static inline int ep_events_available(struct eventpoll *ep)
{
- return !list_empty_careful(&ep->rdllist) ||
- READ_ONCE(ep->ovflist) != EP_UNACTIVE_PTR;
+ bool events_available;
+ unsigned int seq;
+
+ do {
+ seq = read_seqcount_begin(&ep->seq);
+
+ events_available = !list_empty_careful(&ep->rdllist) ||
+ READ_ONCE(ep->ovflist) != EP_UNACTIVE_PTR;
+ } while (read_seqcount_retry(&ep->seq, seq));
+
+ return events_available;
}
#ifdef CONFIG_NET_RX_BUSY_POLL
@@ -735,8 +748,12 @@ static void ep_start_scan(struct eventpoll *ep, struct list_head *txlist)
*/
lockdep_assert_irqs_enabled();
spin_lock_irq(&ep->lock);
+ write_seqcount_begin(&ep->seq);
+
list_splice_init(&ep->rdllist, txlist);
WRITE_ONCE(ep->ovflist, NULL);
+
+ write_seqcount_end(&ep->seq);
spin_unlock_irq(&ep->lock);
}
@@ -768,6 +785,9 @@ static void ep_done_scan(struct eventpoll *ep,
ep_pm_stay_awake(epi);
}
}
+
+ write_seqcount_begin(&ep->seq);
+
/*
* We need to set back ep->ovflist to EP_UNACTIVE_PTR, so that after
* releasing the lock, events will be queued in the normal way inside
@@ -779,6 +799,9 @@ static void ep_done_scan(struct eventpoll *ep,
* Quickly re-inject items left on "txlist".
*/
list_splice(txlist, &ep->rdllist);
+
+ write_seqcount_end(&ep->seq);
+
__pm_relax(ep->ws);
if (!list_empty(&ep->rdllist)) {
@@ -1155,6 +1178,7 @@ static int ep_alloc(struct eventpoll **pep)
mutex_init(&ep->mtx);
spin_lock_init(&ep->lock);
+ seqcount_spinlock_init(&ep->seq, &ep->lock);
init_waitqueue_head(&ep->wq);
init_waitqueue_head(&ep->poll_wait);
INIT_LIST_HEAD(&ep->rdllist);
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2026-05-03 13:24 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 18+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
[not found] <cover.1752824628.git.namcao@linutronix.de>
2025-07-18 7:52 ` [PATCH 2/2] eventpoll: Fix epoll_wait() report false negative Nam Cao
2025-07-18 8:38 ` Soheil Hassas Yeganeh
2025-07-18 8:59 ` Nam Cao
2026-04-29 6:54 ` Christian Brauner
2026-04-29 7:27 ` Nam Cao
2026-04-29 15:34 ` Mateusz Guzik
2026-05-03 13:24 ` Nam Cao [this message]
2026-05-04 12:00 ` David Laight
2025-09-17 12:49 ` Mateusz Guzik
2025-09-17 13:41 ` Nam Cao
2025-09-17 16:05 ` Mateusz Guzik
2025-09-17 16:08 ` Mateusz Guzik
2025-09-17 18:03 ` Khazhy Kumykov
2025-09-17 22:28 ` Khazhy Kumykov
2025-09-17 22:38 ` Mateusz Guzik
2025-09-22 6:26 ` Nam Cao
2025-09-20 14:42 ` David Laight
2025-09-20 14:45 ` Mateusz Guzik
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=87cxzc62yp.fsf@yellow.woof \
--to=namcao@linutronix.de \
--cc=axboe@kernel.dk \
--cc=brauner@kernel.org \
--cc=dave@stgolabs.net \
--cc=edumazet@google.com \
--cc=jack@suse.cz \
--cc=khazhy@google.com \
--cc=linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kselftest@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mjguzik@gmail.com \
--cc=shuah@kernel.org \
--cc=soheil@google.com \
--cc=stable@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk \
--cc=willemb@google.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