From: "Michael Kerrisk (man-pages)" <mtk.manpages@gmail.com> To: Jason Baron <jbaron@akamai.com>, Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org> Cc: mtk.manpages@gmail.com, mingo@kernel.org, peterz@infradead.org, viro@ftp.linux.org.uk, normalperson@yhbt.net, m@silodev.com, corbet@lwn.net, luto@amacapital.net, torvalds@linux-foundation.org, hagen@jauu.net, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, linux-api@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH] epoll: add exclusive wakeups flag Date: Tue, 15 Mar 2016 10:03:57 +1300 [thread overview] Message-ID: <56E7273D.3010403@gmail.com> (raw) In-Reply-To: <56E71894.4090607@gmail.com> Hi Jason, On 03/15/2016 09:01 AM, Michael Kerrisk (man-pages) wrote: > Hi Jason, > > On 03/15/2016 08:32 AM, Jason Baron wrote: >> >> >> On 03/14/2016 01:47 PM, Michael Kerrisk (man-pages) wrote: >>> [Restoring CC, which I see I accidentally dropped, one iteration back.] [...] >>> Returning to the second sentence in this description: >>> >>> When a wakeup event occurs and multiple epoll file descrip‐ >>> tors are attached to the same target file using EPOLLEXCLU‐ >>> SIVE, one or more of the epoll file descriptors will >>> receive an event with epoll_wait(2). >>> >>> There is a point that is unclear to me: what does "target file" refer to? >>> Is it an open file description (aka open file table entry) or an inode? >>> I suspect the former, but it was not clear in your original text. >>> >> >> So from epoll's perspective, the wakeups are associated with a 'wait >> queue'. So if the open() and subsequent EPOLL_CTL_ADD (which is done via >> file->poll()) results in adding to the same 'wait queue' then we will >> get 'exclusive' wakeup behavior. >> >> So in general, I think the answer here is that its associated with the >> inode (I coudn't say with 100% certainty without really looking at all >> file->poll() implementations). Certainly, with the 'FIFO' example below, >> the two scenarios will have the same behavior with respect to >> EPOLLEXCLUSIVE. So, I was actually a little surprised by this, and went away and tested this point. It appears to me that that the two scenarios described below do NOT have the same behavior with respect to EPOLLEXCLUSIVE. See below. > So, in both scenarios, *one or more* processes will get a wakeup? > (I'll try to add something to the text to clarify the detail we're > discussing.) > >> Also, the 'non-exclusive' mode would be subject to the same question of >> which wait queue is the epfd is associated with... > > I'm not sure of the point you are trying to make here? > > Cheers, > > Michael > > >>> To make this point even clearer, here are two scenarios I'm thinking of. >>> In each case, we're talking of monitoring the read end of a FIFO. >>> >>> === >>> >>> Scenario 1: >>> >>> We have three processes each of which >>> 1. Creates an epoll instance >>> 2. Opens the read end of the FIFO >>> 3. Adds the read end of the FIFO to the epoll instance, specifying >>> EPOLLEXCLUSIVE >>> >>> When input becomes available on the FIFO, how many processes >>> get a wakeup? When I test this scenario, all three processes get a wakeup. >>> === >>> >>> Scenario 3 >>> >>> A parent process opens the read end of a FIFO and then calls >>> fork() three times to create three children. Each child then: >>> >>> 1. Creates an epoll instance >>> 2. Adds the read end of the FIFO to the epoll instance, specifying >>> EPOLLEXCLUSIVE >>> >>> When input becomes available on the FIFO, how many processes >>> get a wakeup? When I test this scenario, one process gets a wakeup. In other words, "target file" appears to mean open file description (aka open file table entry), not inode. This is actually what I suspected might be the case, but now I am puzzled. Given what I've discovered and what you suggest are the semantics, is the implementation correct? (I suspect that it is, but it is at odds with your statement above. My test programs are inline below. Cheers, Michael ============ /* t_EPOLLEXCLUSIVE_multipen.c Licensed under GNU GPLv2 or later. */ #include <sys/epoll.h> #include <sys/stat.h> #include <fcntl.h> #include <sys/types.h> #include <stdio.h> #include <stdlib.h> #include <unistd.h> #include <string.h> #define errExit(msg) do { perror(msg); exit(EXIT_FAILURE); \ } while (0) #define usageErr(msg, progName) \ do { fprintf(stderr, "Usage: "); \ fprintf(stderr, msg, progName); \ exit(EXIT_FAILURE); } while (0) #ifndef EPOLLEXCLUSIVE #define EPOLLEXCLUSIVE (1 << 28) #endif int main(int argc, char *argv[]) { int fd, epfd, nready; struct epoll_event ev, rev; if (argc != 2 || strcmp(argv[1], "--help") == 0) usageErr("%s <FIFO>n", argv[0]); epfd = epoll_create(2); if (epfd == -1) errExit("epoll_create"); fd = open(argv[1], O_RDONLY); if (fd == -1) errExit("open"); printf("Opened %s\n", argv[1]); ev.events = EPOLLIN | EPOLLEXCLUSIVE; if (epoll_ctl(epfd, EPOLL_CTL_ADD, fd, &ev) == -1) errExit("epoll_ctl"); nready = epoll_wait(epfd, &rev, 1, -1); if (nready == -1) errExit("epoll-wait"); printf("epoll_wait() returned %d\n", nready); exit(EXIT_SUCCESS); } =============== /* t_EPOLLEXCLUSIVE_fork.c Licensed under GNU GPLv2 or later. */ #include <sys/epoll.h> #include <sys/stat.h> #include <fcntl.h> #include <sys/types.h> #include <sys/wait.h> #include <stdio.h> #include <stdlib.h> #include <unistd.h> #include <string.h> #define errExit(msg) do { perror(msg); exit(EXIT_FAILURE); \ } while (0) #define usageErr(msg, progName) \ do { fprintf(stderr, "Usage: "); \ fprintf(stderr, msg, progName); \ exit(EXIT_FAILURE); } while (0) #ifndef EPOLLEXCLUSIVE #define EPOLLEXCLUSIVE (1 << 28) #endif int main(int argc, char *argv[]) { int fd, epfd, nready; struct epoll_event ev, rev; int cnum; if (argc != 2 || strcmp(argv[1], "--help") == 0) usageErr("%s <FIFO>n", argv[0]); fd = open(argv[1], O_RDONLY); if (fd == -1) errExit("open"); printf("Opened %s\n", argv[1]); for (cnum = 0; cnum < 3; cnum++) { switch (fork()) { case -1: errExit("fork"); case 0: /* Child */ epfd = epoll_create(2); if (epfd == -1) errExit("epoll_create"); ev.events = EPOLLIN | EPOLLEXCLUSIVE; if (epoll_ctl(epfd, EPOLL_CTL_ADD, fd, &ev) == -1) errExit("epoll_ctl"); nready = epoll_wait(epfd, &rev, 1, -1); if (nready == -1) errExit("epoll-wait"); printf("Child %d: epoll_wait() returned %d\n", cnum, nready); exit(EXIT_SUCCESS); default: break; } } wait(NULL); wait(NULL); wait(NULL); exit(EXIT_SUCCESS); } -- Michael Kerrisk Linux man-pages maintainer; http://www.kernel.org/doc/man-pages/ Linux/UNIX System Programming Training: http://man7.org/training/
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: "Michael Kerrisk (man-pages)" <mtk.manpages-Re5JQEeQqe8AvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org> To: Jason Baron <jbaron-JqFfY2XvxFXQT0dZR+AlfA@public.gmane.org>, Andrew Morton <akpm-de/tnXTf+JLsfHDXvbKv3WD2FQJk+8+b@public.gmane.org> Cc: mtk.manpages-Re5JQEeQqe8AvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org, mingo-DgEjT+Ai2ygdnm+yROfE0A@public.gmane.org, peterz-wEGCiKHe2LqWVfeAwA7xHQ@public.gmane.org, viro-rfM+Q5joDG/XmaaqVzeoHQ@public.gmane.org, normalperson-rMlxZR9MS24@public.gmane.org, m@silodev.com, corbet-T1hC0tSOHrs@public.gmane.org, luto-kltTT9wpgjJwATOyAt5JVQ@public.gmane.org, torvalds-de/tnXTf+JLsfHDXvbKv3WD2FQJk+8+b@public.gmane.org, hagen-GvnIQ6b/HdU@public.gmane.org, linux-kernel-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org, linux-fsdevel-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org, linux-api-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org Subject: Re: [PATCH] epoll: add exclusive wakeups flag Date: Tue, 15 Mar 2016 10:03:57 +1300 [thread overview] Message-ID: <56E7273D.3010403@gmail.com> (raw) In-Reply-To: <56E71894.4090607-Re5JQEeQqe8AvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org> Hi Jason, On 03/15/2016 09:01 AM, Michael Kerrisk (man-pages) wrote: > Hi Jason, > > On 03/15/2016 08:32 AM, Jason Baron wrote: >> >> >> On 03/14/2016 01:47 PM, Michael Kerrisk (man-pages) wrote: >>> [Restoring CC, which I see I accidentally dropped, one iteration back.] [...] >>> Returning to the second sentence in this description: >>> >>> When a wakeup event occurs and multiple epoll file descrip‐ >>> tors are attached to the same target file using EPOLLEXCLU‐ >>> SIVE, one or more of the epoll file descriptors will >>> receive an event with epoll_wait(2). >>> >>> There is a point that is unclear to me: what does "target file" refer to? >>> Is it an open file description (aka open file table entry) or an inode? >>> I suspect the former, but it was not clear in your original text. >>> >> >> So from epoll's perspective, the wakeups are associated with a 'wait >> queue'. So if the open() and subsequent EPOLL_CTL_ADD (which is done via >> file->poll()) results in adding to the same 'wait queue' then we will >> get 'exclusive' wakeup behavior. >> >> So in general, I think the answer here is that its associated with the >> inode (I coudn't say with 100% certainty without really looking at all >> file->poll() implementations). Certainly, with the 'FIFO' example below, >> the two scenarios will have the same behavior with respect to >> EPOLLEXCLUSIVE. So, I was actually a little surprised by this, and went away and tested this point. It appears to me that that the two scenarios described below do NOT have the same behavior with respect to EPOLLEXCLUSIVE. See below. > So, in both scenarios, *one or more* processes will get a wakeup? > (I'll try to add something to the text to clarify the detail we're > discussing.) > >> Also, the 'non-exclusive' mode would be subject to the same question of >> which wait queue is the epfd is associated with... > > I'm not sure of the point you are trying to make here? > > Cheers, > > Michael > > >>> To make this point even clearer, here are two scenarios I'm thinking of. >>> In each case, we're talking of monitoring the read end of a FIFO. >>> >>> === >>> >>> Scenario 1: >>> >>> We have three processes each of which >>> 1. Creates an epoll instance >>> 2. Opens the read end of the FIFO >>> 3. Adds the read end of the FIFO to the epoll instance, specifying >>> EPOLLEXCLUSIVE >>> >>> When input becomes available on the FIFO, how many processes >>> get a wakeup? When I test this scenario, all three processes get a wakeup. >>> === >>> >>> Scenario 3 >>> >>> A parent process opens the read end of a FIFO and then calls >>> fork() three times to create three children. Each child then: >>> >>> 1. Creates an epoll instance >>> 2. Adds the read end of the FIFO to the epoll instance, specifying >>> EPOLLEXCLUSIVE >>> >>> When input becomes available on the FIFO, how many processes >>> get a wakeup? When I test this scenario, one process gets a wakeup. In other words, "target file" appears to mean open file description (aka open file table entry), not inode. This is actually what I suspected might be the case, but now I am puzzled. Given what I've discovered and what you suggest are the semantics, is the implementation correct? (I suspect that it is, but it is at odds with your statement above. My test programs are inline below. Cheers, Michael ============ /* t_EPOLLEXCLUSIVE_multipen.c Licensed under GNU GPLv2 or later. */ #include <sys/epoll.h> #include <sys/stat.h> #include <fcntl.h> #include <sys/types.h> #include <stdio.h> #include <stdlib.h> #include <unistd.h> #include <string.h> #define errExit(msg) do { perror(msg); exit(EXIT_FAILURE); \ } while (0) #define usageErr(msg, progName) \ do { fprintf(stderr, "Usage: "); \ fprintf(stderr, msg, progName); \ exit(EXIT_FAILURE); } while (0) #ifndef EPOLLEXCLUSIVE #define EPOLLEXCLUSIVE (1 << 28) #endif int main(int argc, char *argv[]) { int fd, epfd, nready; struct epoll_event ev, rev; if (argc != 2 || strcmp(argv[1], "--help") == 0) usageErr("%s <FIFO>n", argv[0]); epfd = epoll_create(2); if (epfd == -1) errExit("epoll_create"); fd = open(argv[1], O_RDONLY); if (fd == -1) errExit("open"); printf("Opened %s\n", argv[1]); ev.events = EPOLLIN | EPOLLEXCLUSIVE; if (epoll_ctl(epfd, EPOLL_CTL_ADD, fd, &ev) == -1) errExit("epoll_ctl"); nready = epoll_wait(epfd, &rev, 1, -1); if (nready == -1) errExit("epoll-wait"); printf("epoll_wait() returned %d\n", nready); exit(EXIT_SUCCESS); } =============== /* t_EPOLLEXCLUSIVE_fork.c Licensed under GNU GPLv2 or later. */ #include <sys/epoll.h> #include <sys/stat.h> #include <fcntl.h> #include <sys/types.h> #include <sys/wait.h> #include <stdio.h> #include <stdlib.h> #include <unistd.h> #include <string.h> #define errExit(msg) do { perror(msg); exit(EXIT_FAILURE); \ } while (0) #define usageErr(msg, progName) \ do { fprintf(stderr, "Usage: "); \ fprintf(stderr, msg, progName); \ exit(EXIT_FAILURE); } while (0) #ifndef EPOLLEXCLUSIVE #define EPOLLEXCLUSIVE (1 << 28) #endif int main(int argc, char *argv[]) { int fd, epfd, nready; struct epoll_event ev, rev; int cnum; if (argc != 2 || strcmp(argv[1], "--help") == 0) usageErr("%s <FIFO>n", argv[0]); fd = open(argv[1], O_RDONLY); if (fd == -1) errExit("open"); printf("Opened %s\n", argv[1]); for (cnum = 0; cnum < 3; cnum++) { switch (fork()) { case -1: errExit("fork"); case 0: /* Child */ epfd = epoll_create(2); if (epfd == -1) errExit("epoll_create"); ev.events = EPOLLIN | EPOLLEXCLUSIVE; if (epoll_ctl(epfd, EPOLL_CTL_ADD, fd, &ev) == -1) errExit("epoll_ctl"); nready = epoll_wait(epfd, &rev, 1, -1); if (nready == -1) errExit("epoll-wait"); printf("Child %d: epoll_wait() returned %d\n", cnum, nready); exit(EXIT_SUCCESS); default: break; } } wait(NULL); wait(NULL); wait(NULL); exit(EXIT_SUCCESS); } -- Michael Kerrisk Linux man-pages maintainer; http://www.kernel.org/doc/man-pages/ Linux/UNIX System Programming Training: http://man7.org/training/
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2016-03-14 21:04 UTC|newest] Thread overview: 31+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top 2015-12-08 3:23 [PATCH] epoll: add exclusive wakeups flag Jason Baron 2015-12-08 3:23 ` [PATCH] epoll: add EPOLLEXCLUSIVE flag Jason Baron 2015-12-08 3:23 ` Jason Baron 2016-01-28 7:16 ` [PATCH] epoll: add exclusive wakeups flag Michael Kerrisk (man-pages) 2016-01-28 7:16 ` Michael Kerrisk (man-pages) 2016-01-28 17:57 ` Jason Baron 2016-01-29 8:14 ` Michael Kerrisk (man-pages) 2016-02-01 19:42 ` Jason Baron 2016-02-01 19:42 ` Jason Baron 2016-03-10 18:53 ` Jason Baron 2016-03-10 19:47 ` Michael Kerrisk (man-pages) 2016-03-10 19:47 ` Michael Kerrisk (man-pages) 2016-03-10 19:58 ` Michael Kerrisk (man-pages) 2016-03-10 19:58 ` Michael Kerrisk (man-pages) 2016-03-10 20:40 ` Jason Baron 2016-03-10 20:40 ` Jason Baron 2016-03-11 20:30 ` Michael Kerrisk (man-pages) 2016-03-11 20:30 ` Michael Kerrisk (man-pages) [not found] ` <56E32FC5.4030902@akamai.com> [not found] ` <56E353CF.6050503@gmail.com> [not found] ` <56E6D0ED.20609@akamai.com> 2016-03-14 17:47 ` Michael Kerrisk (man-pages) 2016-03-14 19:32 ` Jason Baron 2016-03-14 19:32 ` Jason Baron 2016-03-14 20:01 ` Michael Kerrisk (man-pages) 2016-03-14 20:01 ` Michael Kerrisk (man-pages) 2016-03-14 21:03 ` Michael Kerrisk (man-pages) [this message] 2016-03-14 21:03 ` Michael Kerrisk (man-pages) 2016-03-14 22:35 ` Jason Baron 2016-03-14 23:09 ` Madars Vitolins 2016-03-14 23:26 ` Michael Kerrisk (man-pages) 2016-03-14 23:26 ` Michael Kerrisk (man-pages) 2016-03-15 2:36 ` Jason Baron 2016-03-15 2:36 ` Jason Baron
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=56E7273D.3010403@gmail.com \ --to=mtk.manpages@gmail.com \ --cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \ --cc=corbet@lwn.net \ --cc=hagen@jauu.net \ --cc=jbaron@akamai.com \ --cc=linux-api@vger.kernel.org \ --cc=linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org \ --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \ --cc=luto@amacapital.net \ --cc=m@silodev.com \ --cc=mingo@kernel.org \ --cc=normalperson@yhbt.net \ --cc=peterz@infradead.org \ --cc=torvalds@linux-foundation.org \ --cc=viro@ftp.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: linkBe sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes, see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror all data and code used by this external index.