On 3/28/24 18:52, Jens Axboe wrote:
Move the posting outside the checking and locking, it's cleaner that
way.
Signed-off-by: Jens Axboe <axboe@xxxxxxxxx>
---
io_uring/msg_ring.c | 10 ++++------
1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-)
diff --git a/io_uring/msg_ring.c b/io_uring/msg_ring.c
index cd6dcf634ba3..d1f66a40b4b4 100644
--- a/io_uring/msg_ring.c
+++ b/io_uring/msg_ring.c
@@ -147,13 +147,11 @@ static int io_msg_ring_data(struct io_kiocb *req, unsigned int issue_flags)
if (target_ctx->flags & IORING_SETUP_IOPOLL) {
if (unlikely(io_double_lock_ctx(target_ctx, issue_flags)))
return -EAGAIN;
- if (io_post_aux_cqe(target_ctx, msg->user_data, msg->len, flags))
- ret = 0;
- io_double_unlock_ctx(target_ctx);
- } else {
- if (io_post_aux_cqe(target_ctx, msg->user_data, msg->len, flags))
- ret = 0;
}
A side note, maybe we should just get rid of double locking, it's always
horrible, and always do the job via tw. With DEFER_TASKRUN it only benefits
when rings and bound to the same task => never for any sane use case, so it's
only about !DEFER_TASKRUN. Simpler but also more predictable for general
latency and so on since you need to wait/grab two locks.
+ if (io_post_aux_cqe(target_ctx, msg->user_data, msg->len, flags))
+ ret = 0;
+ if (target_ctx->flags & IORING_SETUP_IOPOLL)
+ io_double_unlock_ctx(target_ctx);
return ret;
}
--
Pavel Begunkov
