* [PATCH] io_uring: use cpu_online() to check p->sq_thread_cpu instead of cpu_possible()
@ 2019-05-07 8:03 Shenghui Wang
2019-05-07 11:22 ` Jeff Moyer
0 siblings, 1 reply; 9+ messages in thread
From: Shenghui Wang @ 2019-05-07 8:03 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: axboe, viro, linux-block, linux-fsdevel; +Cc: jmoyer
This issue is found by running liburing/test/io_uring_setup test.
When test run, the testcase "attempt to bind to invalid cpu" would not
pass with messages like:
io_uring_setup(1, 0xbfc2f7c8), \
flags: IORING_SETUP_SQPOLL|IORING_SETUP_SQ_AFF, \
resv: 0x00000000 0x00000000 0x00000000 0x00000000 0x00000000, \
sq_thread_cpu: 2
expected -1, got 3
FAIL
On my system, there is:
CPU(s) possible : 0-3
CPU(s) online : 0-1
CPU(s) offline : 2-3
CPU(s) present : 0-1
The sq_thread_cpu 2 is offline on my system, so the bind should fail.
But cpu_possible() will pass the check. We shouldn't be able to bind
to an offline cpu. Use cpu_online() to do the check.
After the change, the testcase run as expected: EINVAL will be returned
for cpu offlined.
Signed-off-by: Shenghui Wang <shhuiw@foxmail.com>
---
fs/io_uring.c | 2 +-
1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
diff --git a/fs/io_uring.c b/fs/io_uring.c
index d91cbd53d3ca..718d7b873f4a 100644
--- a/fs/io_uring.c
+++ b/fs/io_uring.c
@@ -2472,7 +2472,7 @@ static int io_sq_offload_start(struct io_ring_ctx *ctx,
nr_cpu_ids);
ret = -EINVAL;
- if (!cpu_possible(cpu))
+ if (!cpu_online(cpu))
goto err;
ctx->sqo_thread = kthread_create_on_cpu(io_sq_thread,
--
2.20.1
^ permalink raw reply related [flat|nested] 9+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH] io_uring: use cpu_online() to check p->sq_thread_cpu instead of cpu_possible()
2019-05-07 8:03 [PATCH] io_uring: use cpu_online() to check p->sq_thread_cpu instead of cpu_possible() Shenghui Wang
@ 2019-05-07 11:22 ` Jeff Moyer
0 siblings, 0 replies; 9+ messages in thread
From: Jeff Moyer @ 2019-05-07 11:22 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Shenghui Wang; +Cc: axboe, viro, linux-block, linux-fsdevel
Shenghui Wang <shhuiw@foxmail.com> writes:
> This issue is found by running liburing/test/io_uring_setup test.
>
> When test run, the testcase "attempt to bind to invalid cpu" would not
> pass with messages like:
> io_uring_setup(1, 0xbfc2f7c8), \
> flags: IORING_SETUP_SQPOLL|IORING_SETUP_SQ_AFF, \
> resv: 0x00000000 0x00000000 0x00000000 0x00000000 0x00000000, \
> sq_thread_cpu: 2
> expected -1, got 3
> FAIL
>
> On my system, there is:
> CPU(s) possible : 0-3
> CPU(s) online : 0-1
> CPU(s) offline : 2-3
> CPU(s) present : 0-1
>
> The sq_thread_cpu 2 is offline on my system, so the bind should fail.
> But cpu_possible() will pass the check. We shouldn't be able to bind
> to an offline cpu. Use cpu_online() to do the check.
>
> After the change, the testcase run as expected: EINVAL will be returned
> for cpu offlined.
>
> Signed-off-by: Shenghui Wang <shhuiw@foxmail.com>
> ---
> fs/io_uring.c | 2 +-
> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
>
> diff --git a/fs/io_uring.c b/fs/io_uring.c
> index d91cbd53d3ca..718d7b873f4a 100644
> --- a/fs/io_uring.c
> +++ b/fs/io_uring.c
> @@ -2472,7 +2472,7 @@ static int io_sq_offload_start(struct io_ring_ctx *ctx,
> nr_cpu_ids);
>
> ret = -EINVAL;
> - if (!cpu_possible(cpu))
> + if (!cpu_online(cpu))
> goto err;
>
> ctx->sqo_thread = kthread_create_on_cpu(io_sq_thread,
Reviewed-by: Jeff Moyer <jmoyer@redhat.com>
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 9+ messages in thread
[parent not found: <20190507080016.1945-1-shhuiw@foxmail.com>]
* Re: [PATCH] io_uring: use cpu_online() to check p->sq_thread_cpu instead of cpu_possible()
[not found] <20190507080016.1945-1-shhuiw@foxmail.com>
@ 2019-05-07 14:40 ` Jens Axboe
0 siblings, 0 replies; 9+ messages in thread
From: Jens Axboe @ 2019-05-07 14:40 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Shenghui Wang, viro, linux-block, linux-fsdevel; +Cc: jmoyer
On 5/7/19 2:00 AM, Shenghui Wang wrote:
> This issue is found by running liburing/test/io_uring_setup test.
>
> When test run, the testcase "attempt to bind to invalid cpu" would not
> pass with messages like:
> io_uring_setup(1, 0xbfc2f7c8), \
> flags: IORING_SETUP_SQPOLL|IORING_SETUP_SQ_AFF, \
> resv: 0x00000000 0x00000000 0x00000000 0x00000000 0x00000000, \
> sq_thread_cpu: 2
> expected -1, got 3
> FAIL
>
> On my system, there is:
> CPU(s) possible : 0-3
> CPU(s) online : 0-1
> CPU(s) offline : 2-3
> CPU(s) present : 0-1
>
> The sq_thread_cpu 2 is offline on my system, so the bind should fail.
> But cpu_possible() will pass the check. We shouldn't be able to bind
> to an offline cpu. Use cpu_online() to do the check.
>
> After the change, the testcase run as expected: EINVAL will be returned
> for cpu offlined.
Applied, thanks.
--
Jens Axboe
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 9+ messages in thread
* [PATCH] io_uring: use cpu_online() to check p->sq_thread_cpu instead of cpu_possible()
@ 2019-05-01 7:24 Shenghui Wang
2019-05-01 11:56 ` Jeff Moyer
0 siblings, 1 reply; 9+ messages in thread
From: Shenghui Wang @ 2019-05-01 7:24 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: axboe, viro, linux-block, linux-fsdevel; +Cc: jmoyer
This issue is found by running liburing/test/io_uring_setup test.
When test run, the testcase "attempt to bind to invalid cpu" would not
pass with messages like:
io_uring_setup(1, 0xbfc2f7c8), \
flags: IORING_SETUP_SQPOLL|IORING_SETUP_SQ_AFF, \
resv: 0x00000000 0x00000000 0x00000000 0x00000000 0x00000000, \
sq_thread_cpu: 2
expected -1, got 3
FAIL
On my system, there is:
CPU(s) possible : 0-3
CPU(s) online : 0-1
CPU(s) offline : 2-3
CPU(s) present : 0-1
The sq_thread_cpu 2 is offline on my system, so the bind should fail.
But cpu_possible() will pass the check. We shouldn't be able to bind
to an offline cpu. Use cpu_online() to do the check.
After the change, the testcase run as expected: EINVAL will be returned
for cpu offlined.
Signed-off-by: Shenghui Wang <shhuiw@foxmail.com>
---
fs/io_uring.c | 4 ++--
1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
diff --git a/fs/io_uring.c b/fs/io_uring.c
index 0e9fb2cb1984..aa3d39860a1c 100644
--- a/fs/io_uring.c
+++ b/fs/io_uring.c
@@ -2241,7 +2241,7 @@ static int io_sq_offload_start(struct io_ring_ctx *ctx,
ctx->sqo_mm = current->mm;
ret = -EINVAL;
- if (!cpu_possible(p->sq_thread_cpu))
+ if (!cpu_online(p->sq_thread_cpu))
goto err;
if (ctx->flags & IORING_SETUP_SQPOLL) {
@@ -2258,7 +2258,7 @@ static int io_sq_offload_start(struct io_ring_ctx *ctx,
cpu = array_index_nospec(p->sq_thread_cpu, NR_CPUS);
ret = -EINVAL;
- if (!cpu_possible(p->sq_thread_cpu))
+ if (!cpu_online(p->sq_thread_cpu))
goto err;
ctx->sqo_thread = kthread_create_on_cpu(io_sq_thread,
--
2.20.1
^ permalink raw reply related [flat|nested] 9+ messages in thread* Re: [PATCH] io_uring: use cpu_online() to check p->sq_thread_cpu instead of cpu_possible()
2019-05-01 7:24 Shenghui Wang
@ 2019-05-01 11:56 ` Jeff Moyer
2019-05-01 14:15 ` Jens Axboe
0 siblings, 1 reply; 9+ messages in thread
From: Jeff Moyer @ 2019-05-01 11:56 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: axboe, Shenghui Wang; +Cc: viro, linux-block, linux-fsdevel
Shenghui Wang <shhuiw@foxmail.com> writes:
> This issue is found by running liburing/test/io_uring_setup test.
>
> When test run, the testcase "attempt to bind to invalid cpu" would not
> pass with messages like:
> io_uring_setup(1, 0xbfc2f7c8), \
> flags: IORING_SETUP_SQPOLL|IORING_SETUP_SQ_AFF, \
> resv: 0x00000000 0x00000000 0x00000000 0x00000000 0x00000000, \
> sq_thread_cpu: 2
> expected -1, got 3
> FAIL
>
> On my system, there is:
> CPU(s) possible : 0-3
> CPU(s) online : 0-1
> CPU(s) offline : 2-3
> CPU(s) present : 0-1
>
> The sq_thread_cpu 2 is offline on my system, so the bind should fail.
> But cpu_possible() will pass the check. We shouldn't be able to bind
> to an offline cpu. Use cpu_online() to do the check.
>
> After the change, the testcase run as expected: EINVAL will be returned
> for cpu offlined.
>
> Signed-off-by: Shenghui Wang <shhuiw@foxmail.com>
> ---
> fs/io_uring.c | 4 ++--
> 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/fs/io_uring.c b/fs/io_uring.c
> index 0e9fb2cb1984..aa3d39860a1c 100644
> --- a/fs/io_uring.c
> +++ b/fs/io_uring.c
> @@ -2241,7 +2241,7 @@ static int io_sq_offload_start(struct io_ring_ctx *ctx,
> ctx->sqo_mm = current->mm;
>
> ret = -EINVAL;
> - if (!cpu_possible(p->sq_thread_cpu))
> + if (!cpu_online(p->sq_thread_cpu))
> goto err;
>
> if (ctx->flags & IORING_SETUP_SQPOLL) {
> @@ -2258,7 +2258,7 @@ static int io_sq_offload_start(struct io_ring_ctx *ctx,
>
> cpu = array_index_nospec(p->sq_thread_cpu, NR_CPUS);
> ret = -EINVAL;
> - if (!cpu_possible(p->sq_thread_cpu))
> + if (!cpu_online(p->sq_thread_cpu))
> goto err;
>
> ctx->sqo_thread = kthread_create_on_cpu(io_sq_thread,
Hmm. Why are we doing this check twice? Oh... Jens, I think you
braino'd commit 917257daa0fea. Have a look. You probably wanted to get
rid of the first check for cpu_possible.
-Jeff
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 9+ messages in thread* Re: [PATCH] io_uring: use cpu_online() to check p->sq_thread_cpu instead of cpu_possible()
2019-05-01 11:56 ` Jeff Moyer
@ 2019-05-01 14:15 ` Jens Axboe
2019-05-01 14:32 ` Jeff Moyer
0 siblings, 1 reply; 9+ messages in thread
From: Jens Axboe @ 2019-05-01 14:15 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Jeff Moyer, Shenghui Wang; +Cc: viro, linux-block, linux-fsdevel
On 5/1/19 5:56 AM, Jeff Moyer wrote:
> Shenghui Wang <shhuiw@foxmail.com> writes:
>
>> This issue is found by running liburing/test/io_uring_setup test.
>>
>> When test run, the testcase "attempt to bind to invalid cpu" would not
>> pass with messages like:
>> io_uring_setup(1, 0xbfc2f7c8), \
>> flags: IORING_SETUP_SQPOLL|IORING_SETUP_SQ_AFF, \
>> resv: 0x00000000 0x00000000 0x00000000 0x00000000 0x00000000, \
>> sq_thread_cpu: 2
>> expected -1, got 3
>> FAIL
>>
>> On my system, there is:
>> CPU(s) possible : 0-3
>> CPU(s) online : 0-1
>> CPU(s) offline : 2-3
>> CPU(s) present : 0-1
>>
>> The sq_thread_cpu 2 is offline on my system, so the bind should fail.
>> But cpu_possible() will pass the check. We shouldn't be able to bind
>> to an offline cpu. Use cpu_online() to do the check.
>>
>> After the change, the testcase run as expected: EINVAL will be returned
>> for cpu offlined.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Shenghui Wang <shhuiw@foxmail.com>
>> ---
>> fs/io_uring.c | 4 ++--
>> 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/fs/io_uring.c b/fs/io_uring.c
>> index 0e9fb2cb1984..aa3d39860a1c 100644
>> --- a/fs/io_uring.c
>> +++ b/fs/io_uring.c
>> @@ -2241,7 +2241,7 @@ static int io_sq_offload_start(struct io_ring_ctx *ctx,
>> ctx->sqo_mm = current->mm;
>>
>> ret = -EINVAL;
>> - if (!cpu_possible(p->sq_thread_cpu))
>> + if (!cpu_online(p->sq_thread_cpu))
>> goto err;
>>
>> if (ctx->flags & IORING_SETUP_SQPOLL) {
>> @@ -2258,7 +2258,7 @@ static int io_sq_offload_start(struct io_ring_ctx *ctx,
>>
>> cpu = array_index_nospec(p->sq_thread_cpu, NR_CPUS);
>> ret = -EINVAL;
>> - if (!cpu_possible(p->sq_thread_cpu))
>> + if (!cpu_online(p->sq_thread_cpu))
>> goto err;
>>
>> ctx->sqo_thread = kthread_create_on_cpu(io_sq_thread,
>
> Hmm. Why are we doing this check twice? Oh... Jens, I think you
> braino'd commit 917257daa0fea. Have a look. You probably wanted to get
> rid of the first check for cpu_possible.
Added a fixup patch the other day:
http://git.kernel.dk/cgit/linux-block/commit/?h=for-linus&id=362bf8670efccebca22efda1ee5a5ee831ec5efb
--
Jens Axboe
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 9+ messages in thread* Re: [PATCH] io_uring: use cpu_online() to check p->sq_thread_cpu instead of cpu_possible()
2019-05-01 14:15 ` Jens Axboe
@ 2019-05-01 14:32 ` Jeff Moyer
2019-05-01 14:39 ` Jens Axboe
0 siblings, 1 reply; 9+ messages in thread
From: Jeff Moyer @ 2019-05-01 14:32 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Jens Axboe; +Cc: Shenghui Wang, viro, linux-block, linux-fsdevel
Jens Axboe <axboe@kernel.dk> writes:
> On 5/1/19 5:56 AM, Jeff Moyer wrote:
>> Shenghui Wang <shhuiw@foxmail.com> writes:
>>
>>> This issue is found by running liburing/test/io_uring_setup test.
>>>
>>> When test run, the testcase "attempt to bind to invalid cpu" would not
>>> pass with messages like:
>>> io_uring_setup(1, 0xbfc2f7c8), \
>>> flags: IORING_SETUP_SQPOLL|IORING_SETUP_SQ_AFF, \
>>> resv: 0x00000000 0x00000000 0x00000000 0x00000000 0x00000000, \
>>> sq_thread_cpu: 2
>>> expected -1, got 3
>>> FAIL
>>>
>>> On my system, there is:
>>> CPU(s) possible : 0-3
>>> CPU(s) online : 0-1
>>> CPU(s) offline : 2-3
>>> CPU(s) present : 0-1
>>>
>>> The sq_thread_cpu 2 is offline on my system, so the bind should fail.
>>> But cpu_possible() will pass the check. We shouldn't be able to bind
>>> to an offline cpu. Use cpu_online() to do the check.
>>>
>>> After the change, the testcase run as expected: EINVAL will be returned
>>> for cpu offlined.
>>>
>>> Signed-off-by: Shenghui Wang <shhuiw@foxmail.com>
>>> ---
>>> fs/io_uring.c | 4 ++--
>>> 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
>>>
>>> diff --git a/fs/io_uring.c b/fs/io_uring.c
>>> index 0e9fb2cb1984..aa3d39860a1c 100644
>>> --- a/fs/io_uring.c
>>> +++ b/fs/io_uring.c
>>> @@ -2241,7 +2241,7 @@ static int io_sq_offload_start(struct io_ring_ctx *ctx,
>>> ctx->sqo_mm = current->mm;
>>>
>>> ret = -EINVAL;
>>> - if (!cpu_possible(p->sq_thread_cpu))
>>> + if (!cpu_online(p->sq_thread_cpu))
>>> goto err;
>>>
>>> if (ctx->flags & IORING_SETUP_SQPOLL) {
>>> @@ -2258,7 +2258,7 @@ static int io_sq_offload_start(struct io_ring_ctx *ctx,
>>>
>>> cpu = array_index_nospec(p->sq_thread_cpu, NR_CPUS);
>>> ret = -EINVAL;
>>> - if (!cpu_possible(p->sq_thread_cpu))
>>> + if (!cpu_online(p->sq_thread_cpu))
>>> goto err;
>>>
>>> ctx->sqo_thread = kthread_create_on_cpu(io_sq_thread,
>>
>> Hmm. Why are we doing this check twice? Oh... Jens, I think you
>> braino'd commit 917257daa0fea. Have a look. You probably wanted to get
>> rid of the first check for cpu_possible.
>
> Added a fixup patch the other day:
>
> http://git.kernel.dk/cgit/linux-block/commit/?h=for-linus&id=362bf8670efccebca22efda1ee5a5ee831ec5efb
@@ -2333,13 +2329,14 @@ static int io_sq_offload_start(struct io_ring_ctx *ctx,
ctx->sq_thread_idle = HZ;
if (p->flags & IORING_SETUP_SQ_AFF) {
- int cpu;
+ int cpu = p->sq_thread_cpu;
- cpu = array_index_nospec(p->sq_thread_cpu, NR_CPUS);
ret = -EINVAL;
- if (!cpu_possible(p->sq_thread_cpu))
+ if (cpu >= nr_cpu_ids || !cpu_possible(cpu))
goto err;
+ cpu = array_index_nospec(cpu, nr_cpu_ids);
+
Why do you do the array_index_nospec last? Why wouldn't that be written
as:
if (p->flags & IORING_SETUP_SQ_AFF) {
int cpu = array_index_nospec(p->sq_thread_cpu, nr_cpu_ids);
ret = -EINVAL;
if (!cpu_possible(cpu))
goto err;
ctx->sqo_thread = kthread_create_on_cpu(io_sq_thread,
ctx, cpu,
"io_uring-sq");
} else {
...
That would take away some head-scratching for me.
Cheers,
Jeff
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 9+ messages in thread* Re: [PATCH] io_uring: use cpu_online() to check p->sq_thread_cpu instead of cpu_possible()
2019-05-01 14:32 ` Jeff Moyer
@ 2019-05-01 14:39 ` Jens Axboe
2019-05-01 15:40 ` Jeff Moyer
0 siblings, 1 reply; 9+ messages in thread
From: Jens Axboe @ 2019-05-01 14:39 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Jeff Moyer; +Cc: Shenghui Wang, viro, linux-block, linux-fsdevel
On 5/1/19 8:32 AM, Jeff Moyer wrote:
> Jens Axboe <axboe@kernel.dk> writes:
>
>> On 5/1/19 5:56 AM, Jeff Moyer wrote:
>>> Shenghui Wang <shhuiw@foxmail.com> writes:
>>>
>>>> This issue is found by running liburing/test/io_uring_setup test.
>>>>
>>>> When test run, the testcase "attempt to bind to invalid cpu" would not
>>>> pass with messages like:
>>>> io_uring_setup(1, 0xbfc2f7c8), \
>>>> flags: IORING_SETUP_SQPOLL|IORING_SETUP_SQ_AFF, \
>>>> resv: 0x00000000 0x00000000 0x00000000 0x00000000 0x00000000, \
>>>> sq_thread_cpu: 2
>>>> expected -1, got 3
>>>> FAIL
>>>>
>>>> On my system, there is:
>>>> CPU(s) possible : 0-3
>>>> CPU(s) online : 0-1
>>>> CPU(s) offline : 2-3
>>>> CPU(s) present : 0-1
>>>>
>>>> The sq_thread_cpu 2 is offline on my system, so the bind should fail.
>>>> But cpu_possible() will pass the check. We shouldn't be able to bind
>>>> to an offline cpu. Use cpu_online() to do the check.
>>>>
>>>> After the change, the testcase run as expected: EINVAL will be returned
>>>> for cpu offlined.
>>>>
>>>> Signed-off-by: Shenghui Wang <shhuiw@foxmail.com>
>>>> ---
>>>> fs/io_uring.c | 4 ++--
>>>> 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
>>>>
>>>> diff --git a/fs/io_uring.c b/fs/io_uring.c
>>>> index 0e9fb2cb1984..aa3d39860a1c 100644
>>>> --- a/fs/io_uring.c
>>>> +++ b/fs/io_uring.c
>>>> @@ -2241,7 +2241,7 @@ static int io_sq_offload_start(struct io_ring_ctx *ctx,
>>>> ctx->sqo_mm = current->mm;
>>>>
>>>> ret = -EINVAL;
>>>> - if (!cpu_possible(p->sq_thread_cpu))
>>>> + if (!cpu_online(p->sq_thread_cpu))
>>>> goto err;
>>>>
>>>> if (ctx->flags & IORING_SETUP_SQPOLL) {
>>>> @@ -2258,7 +2258,7 @@ static int io_sq_offload_start(struct io_ring_ctx *ctx,
>>>>
>>>> cpu = array_index_nospec(p->sq_thread_cpu, NR_CPUS);
>>>> ret = -EINVAL;
>>>> - if (!cpu_possible(p->sq_thread_cpu))
>>>> + if (!cpu_online(p->sq_thread_cpu))
>>>> goto err;
>>>>
>>>> ctx->sqo_thread = kthread_create_on_cpu(io_sq_thread,
>>>
>>> Hmm. Why are we doing this check twice? Oh... Jens, I think you
>>> braino'd commit 917257daa0fea. Have a look. You probably wanted to get
>>> rid of the first check for cpu_possible.
>>
>> Added a fixup patch the other day:
>>
>> http://git.kernel.dk/cgit/linux-block/commit/?h=for-linus&id=362bf8670efccebca22efda1ee5a5ee831ec5efb
>
> @@ -2333,13 +2329,14 @@ static int io_sq_offload_start(struct io_ring_ctx *ctx,
> ctx->sq_thread_idle = HZ;
>
> if (p->flags & IORING_SETUP_SQ_AFF) {
> - int cpu;
> + int cpu = p->sq_thread_cpu;
>
> - cpu = array_index_nospec(p->sq_thread_cpu, NR_CPUS);
> ret = -EINVAL;
> - if (!cpu_possible(p->sq_thread_cpu))
> + if (cpu >= nr_cpu_ids || !cpu_possible(cpu))
> goto err;
>
> + cpu = array_index_nospec(cpu, nr_cpu_ids);
> +
>
> Why do you do the array_index_nospec last? Why wouldn't that be written
> as:
>
> if (p->flags & IORING_SETUP_SQ_AFF) {
> int cpu = array_index_nospec(p->sq_thread_cpu, nr_cpu_ids);
>
> ret = -EINVAL;
> if (!cpu_possible(cpu))
> goto err;
>
> ctx->sqo_thread = kthread_create_on_cpu(io_sq_thread,
> ctx, cpu,
> "io_uring-sq");
> } else {
> ...
>
> That would take away some head-scratching for me.
Agree, I've cleaned it up, it was a bit of a mess.
--
Jens Axboe
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 9+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2019-05-07 14:40 UTC | newest]
Thread overview: 9+ messages (download: mbox.gz / follow: Atom feed)
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2019-05-07 8:03 [PATCH] io_uring: use cpu_online() to check p->sq_thread_cpu instead of cpu_possible() Shenghui Wang
2019-05-07 11:22 ` Jeff Moyer
[not found] <20190507080016.1945-1-shhuiw@foxmail.com>
2019-05-07 14:40 ` Jens Axboe
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2019-05-01 7:24 Shenghui Wang
2019-05-01 11:56 ` Jeff Moyer
2019-05-01 14:15 ` Jens Axboe
2019-05-01 14:32 ` Jeff Moyer
2019-05-01 14:39 ` Jens Axboe
2019-05-01 15:40 ` Jeff Moyer
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).