Re: [PATCH v4 2/3] io_uring: avoid ring quiesce while registering/unregistering eventfd

From: Jens Axboe
Date: Thu Feb 03 2022 - 13:49:17 EST


On 2/3/22 11:24 AM, Usama Arif wrote:
> -static inline bool io_should_trigger_evfd(struct io_ring_ctx *ctx)
> +static void io_eventfd_signal(struct io_ring_ctx *ctx)
> {
> - if (likely(!ctx->cq_ev_fd))
> - return false;
> + struct io_ev_fd *ev_fd;
> +
> + rcu_read_lock();
> + /* rcu_dereference ctx->io_ev_fd once and use it for both for checking and eventfd_signal */
> + ev_fd = rcu_dereference(ctx->io_ev_fd);
> +
> + if (likely(!ev_fd))
> + goto out;
> if (READ_ONCE(ctx->rings->cq_flags) & IORING_CQ_EVENTFD_DISABLED)
> - return false;
> - return !ctx->eventfd_async || io_wq_current_is_worker();
> + goto out;
> +
> + if (!ctx->eventfd_async || io_wq_current_is_worker())
> + eventfd_signal(ev_fd->cq_ev_fd, 1);
> +
> +out:
> + rcu_read_unlock();
> }

This still needs what we discussed in v3, something ala:

/*
* This will potential race with eventfd registration, but that's
* always going to be the case if there is IO inflight while an eventfd
* descriptor is being registered.
*/
if (!rcu_dereference_raw(ctx->io_ev_fd))
return;

rcu_read_lock();
...

which I think is cheap enough and won't hit sparse complaints. The

> @@ -9353,35 +9370,70 @@ static int __io_sqe_buffers_update(struct io_ring_ctx *ctx,
>
> static int io_eventfd_register(struct io_ring_ctx *ctx, void __user *arg)
> {
> + struct io_ev_fd *ev_fd;
> __s32 __user *fds = arg;
> - int fd;
> + int fd, ret;
>
> - if (ctx->cq_ev_fd)
> - return -EBUSY;
> + mutex_lock(&ctx->ev_fd_lock);
> + ret = -EBUSY;
> + if (rcu_dereference_protected(ctx->io_ev_fd, lockdep_is_held(&ctx->ev_fd_lock))) {
> + rcu_barrier();
> + if(rcu_dereference_protected(ctx->io_ev_fd, lockdep_is_held(&ctx->ev_fd_lock)))
> + goto out;
> + }

I wonder if we can get away with assigning ctx->io_ev_fd to NULL when we
do the call_rcu(). The struct itself will remain valid as long as we're
under rcu_read_lock() protection, so I think we'd be fine? If we do
that, then we don't need any rcu_barrier() or synchronize_rcu() calls,
as we can register a new one while the previous one is still being
killed.

Hmm?

> static int io_eventfd_unregister(struct io_ring_ctx *ctx)
> {
> - if (ctx->cq_ev_fd) {
> - eventfd_ctx_put(ctx->cq_ev_fd);
> - ctx->cq_ev_fd = NULL;
> - return 0;
> + struct io_ev_fd *ev_fd;
> + int ret;
> +
> + mutex_lock(&ctx->ev_fd_lock);
> + ev_fd = rcu_dereference_protected(ctx->io_ev_fd, lockdep_is_held(&ctx->ev_fd_lock));
> + if (ev_fd) {
> + call_rcu(&ev_fd->rcu, io_eventfd_put);
> + ret = 0;
> + goto out;
> }
> + ret = -ENXIO;
>
> - return -ENXIO;
> +out:
> + mutex_unlock(&ctx->ev_fd_lock);
> + return ret;
> }

I also think that'd be cleaner without the goto:

{
struct io_ev_fd *ev_fd;
int ret;

mutex_lock(&ctx->ev_fd_lock);
ev_fd = rcu_dereference_protected(ctx->io_ev_fd,
lockdep_is_held(&ctx->ev_fd_lock));
if (ev_fd) {
call_rcu(&ev_fd->rcu, io_eventfd_put);
mutex_unlock(&ctx->ev_fd_lock);
return 0;
}

mutex_unlock(&ctx->ev_fd_lock);
return -ENXIO;
}

--
Jens Axboe