From: Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de>
To: Miklos Szeredi <miklos@szeredi.hu>
Cc: Bart Van Assche <bvanassche@acm.org>,
Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de>,
Alexander Viro <viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk>,
linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, linux-aio <linux-aio@kvack.org>,
syzbot <syzkaller@googlegroups.com>,
Avi Kivity <avi@scylladb.com>, Eric Dumazet <edumazet@google.com>,
stable <stable@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] aio: Fix locking in aio_poll()
Date: Wed, 6 Feb 2019 14:47:58 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20190206134758.GB29185@lst.de> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20190206083626.GA19821@veci.piliscsaba.redhat.com>
On Wed, Feb 06, 2019 at 09:36:26AM +0100, Miklos Szeredi wrote:
> Yep. And is AIO doing anything in irq context? If so, why?
Because all waitqueues can be woken, and often are woken from irq
context.
>
> Would it make sense to just disable AIO on file descriptors where it makes zero
> sense?
using aio poll makes sense on every fd, just like you can use epoll
or the upcoming io_uring poll on every fd.
Just use the waitqueue API properly in fuse and we are done:
diff --git a/fs/fuse/dev.c b/fs/fuse/dev.c
index a5e516a40e7a..1c693bb6339a 100644
--- a/fs/fuse/dev.c
+++ b/fs/fuse/dev.c
@@ -387,7 +387,7 @@ void fuse_queue_forget(struct fuse_conn *fc, struct fuse_forget_link *forget,
forget->forget_one.nodeid = nodeid;
forget->forget_one.nlookup = nlookup;
- spin_lock(&fiq->waitq.lock);
+ spin_lock_irq(&fiq->waitq.lock);
if (fiq->connected) {
fiq->forget_list_tail->next = forget;
fiq->forget_list_tail = forget;
@@ -396,7 +396,7 @@ void fuse_queue_forget(struct fuse_conn *fc, struct fuse_forget_link *forget,
} else {
kfree(forget);
}
- spin_unlock(&fiq->waitq.lock);
+ spin_unlock_irq(&fiq->waitq.lock);
}
static void flush_bg_queue(struct fuse_conn *fc)
@@ -410,10 +410,10 @@ static void flush_bg_queue(struct fuse_conn *fc)
req = list_first_entry(&fc->bg_queue, struct fuse_req, list);
list_del(&req->list);
fc->active_background++;
- spin_lock(&fiq->waitq.lock);
+ spin_lock_irq(&fiq->waitq.lock);
req->in.h.unique = fuse_get_unique(fiq);
queue_request(fiq, req);
- spin_unlock(&fiq->waitq.lock);
+ spin_unlock_irq(&fiq->waitq.lock);
}
}
@@ -472,7 +472,7 @@ static void request_end(struct fuse_conn *fc, struct fuse_req *req)
static void queue_interrupt(struct fuse_iqueue *fiq, struct fuse_req *req)
{
- spin_lock(&fiq->waitq.lock);
+ spin_lock_irq(&fiq->waitq.lock);
if (test_bit(FR_FINISHED, &req->flags)) {
spin_unlock(&fiq->waitq.lock);
return;
@@ -481,7 +481,7 @@ static void queue_interrupt(struct fuse_iqueue *fiq, struct fuse_req *req)
list_add_tail(&req->intr_entry, &fiq->interrupts);
wake_up_locked(&fiq->waitq);
}
- spin_unlock(&fiq->waitq.lock);
+ spin_unlock_irq(&fiq->waitq.lock);
kill_fasync(&fiq->fasync, SIGIO, POLL_IN);
}
@@ -535,9 +535,9 @@ static void __fuse_request_send(struct fuse_conn *fc, struct fuse_req *req)
struct fuse_iqueue *fiq = &fc->iq;
BUG_ON(test_bit(FR_BACKGROUND, &req->flags));
- spin_lock(&fiq->waitq.lock);
+ spin_lock_irq(&fiq->waitq.lock);
if (!fiq->connected) {
- spin_unlock(&fiq->waitq.lock);
+ spin_unlock_irq(&fiq->waitq.lock);
req->out.h.error = -ENOTCONN;
} else {
req->in.h.unique = fuse_get_unique(fiq);
@@ -545,7 +545,7 @@ static void __fuse_request_send(struct fuse_conn *fc, struct fuse_req *req)
/* acquire extra reference, since request is still needed
after request_end() */
__fuse_get_request(req);
- spin_unlock(&fiq->waitq.lock);
+ spin_unlock_irq(&fiq->waitq.lock);
request_wait_answer(fc, req);
/* Pairs with smp_wmb() in request_end() */
@@ -676,12 +676,12 @@ static int fuse_request_send_notify_reply(struct fuse_conn *fc,
__clear_bit(FR_ISREPLY, &req->flags);
req->in.h.unique = unique;
- spin_lock(&fiq->waitq.lock);
+ spin_lock_irq(&fiq->waitq.lock);
if (fiq->connected) {
queue_request(fiq, req);
err = 0;
}
- spin_unlock(&fiq->waitq.lock);
+ spin_unlock_irq(&fiq->waitq.lock);
return err;
}
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2019-02-06 13:48 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 12+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2019-02-04 17:45 [PATCH] aio: Fix locking in aio_poll() Bart Van Assche
2019-02-04 17:49 ` Christoph Hellwig
2019-02-05 8:12 ` Miklos Szeredi
2019-02-06 0:53 ` Bart Van Assche
2019-02-06 8:36 ` Miklos Szeredi
2019-02-06 13:47 ` Christoph Hellwig [this message]
2019-02-06 14:31 ` Miklos Szeredi
2019-02-06 13:39 ` Christoph Hellwig
2019-02-09 0:59 Bart Van Assche
2019-02-12 7:56 ` Christoph Hellwig
2019-02-21 22:28 ` Bart Van Assche
2019-02-22 3:17 ` Al Viro
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=20190206134758.GB29185@lst.de \
--to=hch@lst.de \
--cc=avi@scylladb.com \
--cc=bvanassche@acm.org \
--cc=edumazet@google.com \
--cc=linux-aio@kvack.org \
--cc=linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=miklos@szeredi.hu \
--cc=stable@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=syzkaller@googlegroups.com \
--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;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).