From: Pavel Begunkov <asml.silence@gmail.com>
To: io-uring@vger.kernel.org
Cc: Jens Axboe <axboe@kernel.dk>, asml.silence@gmail.com
Subject: [PATCH 1/1] io_uring: fix io_queue_proc modifying req->flags
Date: Thu, 7 Mar 2024 18:06:32 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <455cc49e38cf32026fa1b49670be8c162c2cb583.1709834755.git.asml.silence@gmail.com> (raw)
With multiple poll entries __io_queue_proc() might be running in
parallel with poll handlers and possibly task_work, we should not be
carelessly modifying req->flags there. io_poll_double_prepare() handles
a similar case with locking but it's much easier to move it into
__io_arm_poll_handler().
Cc: stable@vger.kernel.org
Fixes: 595e52284d24a ("io_uring/poll: don't enable lazy wake for POLLEXCLUSIVE")
Signed-off-by: Pavel Begunkov <asml.silence@gmail.com>
---
io_uring/poll.c | 19 +++++++++++--------
1 file changed, 11 insertions(+), 8 deletions(-)
diff --git a/io_uring/poll.c b/io_uring/poll.c
index 053d738c330c..5f779139cae1 100644
--- a/io_uring/poll.c
+++ b/io_uring/poll.c
@@ -540,14 +540,6 @@ static void __io_queue_proc(struct io_poll *poll, struct io_poll_table *pt,
poll->wait.private = (void *) wqe_private;
if (poll->events & EPOLLEXCLUSIVE) {
- /*
- * Exclusive waits may only wake a limited amount of entries
- * rather than all of them, this may interfere with lazy
- * wake if someone does wait(events > 1). Ensure we don't do
- * lazy wake for those, as we need to process each one as they
- * come in.
- */
- req->flags |= REQ_F_POLL_NO_LAZY;
add_wait_queue_exclusive(head, &poll->wait);
} else {
add_wait_queue(head, &poll->wait);
@@ -616,6 +608,17 @@ static int __io_arm_poll_handler(struct io_kiocb *req,
if (issue_flags & IO_URING_F_UNLOCKED)
req->flags &= ~REQ_F_HASH_LOCKED;
+
+ /*
+ * Exclusive waits may only wake a limited amount of entries
+ * rather than all of them, this may interfere with lazy
+ * wake if someone does wait(events > 1). Ensure we don't do
+ * lazy wake for those, as we need to process each one as they
+ * come in.
+ */
+ if (poll->events & EPOLLEXCLUSIVE)
+ req->flags |= REQ_F_POLL_NO_LAZY;
+
mask = vfs_poll(req->file, &ipt->pt) & poll->events;
if (unlikely(ipt->error || !ipt->nr_entries)) {
--
2.43.0
next reply other threads:[~2024-03-07 18:08 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 2+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2024-03-07 18:06 Pavel Begunkov [this message]
2024-03-07 18:48 ` [PATCH 1/1] io_uring: fix io_queue_proc modifying req->flags Jens Axboe
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=455cc49e38cf32026fa1b49670be8c162c2cb583.1709834755.git.asml.silence@gmail.com \
--to=asml.silence@gmail.com \
--cc=axboe@kernel.dk \
--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;
as well as URLs for read-only IMAP folder(s) and NNTP newsgroup(s).