From: Jens Axboe <axboe@kernel.dk>
To: yangerkun <yangerkun@huawei.com>, linux-block@vger.kernel.org
Cc: yi.zhang@huawei.com, houtao1@huawei.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH V3] io_uring: consider the overflow of sequence for timeout req
Date: Tue, 15 Oct 2019 19:45:00 -0600 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <a9ba7785-8e69-7c00-95f9-5c91e6315a8f@kernel.dk> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <df96c0e3-873f-6a54-9e71-0c57d3b6720d@huawei.com>
On 10/15/19 7:35 PM, yangerkun wrote:
>
>
> On 2019/10/15 21:59, yangerkun wrote:
>> Now we recalculate the sequence of timeout with 'req->sequence =
>> ctx->cached_sq_head + count - 1', judge the right place to insert
>> for timeout_list by compare the number of request we still expected for
>> completion. But we have not consider about the situation of overflow:
>>
>> 1. ctx->cached_sq_head + count - 1 may overflow. And a bigger count for
>> the new timeout req can have a small req->sequence.
>>
>> 2. cached_sq_head of now may overflow compare with before req. And it
>> will lead the timeout req with small req->sequence.
>>
>> This overflow will lead to the misorder of timeout_list, which can lead
>> to the wrong order of the completion of timeout_list. Fix it by reuse
>> req->submit.sequence to store the count, and change the logic of
>> inserting sort in io_timeout.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: yangerkun <yangerkun@huawei.com>
>> ---
>> fs/io_uring.c | 27 +++++++++++++++++++++------
>> 1 file changed, 21 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/fs/io_uring.c b/fs/io_uring.c
>> index 76fdbe84aff5..c9512da06973 100644
>> --- a/fs/io_uring.c
>> +++ b/fs/io_uring.c
>> @@ -1884,7 +1884,7 @@ static enum hrtimer_restart io_timeout_fn(struct hrtimer *timer)
>>
>> static int io_timeout(struct io_kiocb *req, const struct io_uring_sqe *sqe)
>> {
>> - unsigned count, req_dist, tail_index;
>> + unsigned count;
>> struct io_ring_ctx *ctx = req->ctx;
>> struct list_head *entry;
>> struct timespec64 ts;
>> @@ -1907,21 +1907,36 @@ static int io_timeout(struct io_kiocb *req, const struct io_uring_sqe *sqe)
>> count = 1;
>>
>> req->sequence = ctx->cached_sq_head + count - 1;
>> + /* reuse it to store the count */
>> + req->submit.sequence = count;
>> req->flags |= REQ_F_TIMEOUT;
>>
>> /*
>> * Insertion sort, ensuring the first entry in the list is always
>> * the one we need first.
>> */
>> - tail_index = ctx->cached_cq_tail - ctx->rings->sq_dropped;
>> - req_dist = req->sequence - tail_index;
>> spin_lock_irq(&ctx->completion_lock);
>> list_for_each_prev(entry, &ctx->timeout_list) {
>> struct io_kiocb *nxt = list_entry(entry, struct io_kiocb, list);
>> - unsigned dist;
>> + unsigned nxt_sq_head;
>> + long long tmp, tmp_nxt;
>>
>> - dist = nxt->sequence - tail_index;
>> - if (req_dist >= dist)
>> + /*
>> + * Since cached_sq_head + count - 1 can overflow, use type long
>> + * long to store it.
>> + */
>> + tmp = (long long)ctx->cached_sq_head + count - 1;
>> + nxt_sq_head = nxt->sequence - nxt->submit.sequence + 1;
>> + tmp_nxt = (long long)nxt_sq_head + nxt->submit.sequence - 1;
>> +
>> + /*
>> + * cached_sq_head may overflow, and it will never overflow twice
>> + * once there is some timeout req still be valid.
>> + */
>> + if (ctx->cached_sq_head < nxt_sq_head)
>> + tmp_nxt += UINT_MAX;
>
> Maybe there is a mistake, it should be tmp. So sorry about this.
I ran it through the basic testing, but I guess it doesn't catch overflow
cases. Maybe we can come up with one? Should be pretty simple to setup a
io_uring, post UINT_MAX - 10 nops (or something like that), then do some
timeout testing.
Just send an incremental patch to fix it.
--
Jens Axboe
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2019-10-16 1:45 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 5+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2019-10-15 13:59 [PATCH V3] io_uring: consider the overflow of sequence for timeout req yangerkun
2019-10-15 14:52 ` Jens Axboe
2019-10-16 1:35 ` yangerkun
2019-10-16 1:45 ` Jens Axboe [this message]
2019-10-16 2:19 ` yangerkun
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=a9ba7785-8e69-7c00-95f9-5c91e6315a8f@kernel.dk \
--to=axboe@kernel.dk \
--cc=houtao1@huawei.com \
--cc=linux-block@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=yangerkun@huawei.com \
--cc=yi.zhang@huawei.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;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).