On 3/21/25 19:24, Jens Axboe wrote:
Don't gate this on the task exiting flag. It's generally not a good idea
Do you refer to tw add and the PF_EXITING logic inside? We can't gate
it solely on dying refs as it's not sync'ed (and the patch doesn't).
And task is dying is not same as ring is closed. E.g. a task can
exit(2) but leave the ring intact to other tasks.
to gate it on the task PF_EXITING flag anyway. Once the ring is starting
to go through ring teardown, the ref is marked as dying. Use that as
our fallback/cancel mechanism.
Signed-off-by: Jens Axboe <axboe@xxxxxxxxx>
---
io_uring/io_uring.c | 6 ++++--
1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
diff --git a/io_uring/io_uring.c b/io_uring/io_uring.c
index 2b9dae588f04..984db01f5184 100644
--- a/io_uring/io_uring.c
+++ b/io_uring/io_uring.c
@@ -555,7 +555,8 @@ static void io_queue_iowq(struct io_kiocb *req)
* procedure rather than attempt to run this request (or create a new
* worker for it).
*/
- if (WARN_ON_ONCE(!same_thread_group(tctx->task, current)))
+ if (WARN_ON_ONCE(!same_thread_group(tctx->task, current) &&
+ !percpu_ref_is_dying(&req->ctx->refs)))
Should it be "||"? Otherwise I don't understand the purpose of it.
atomic_or(IO_WQ_WORK_CANCEL, &req->work.flags);
trace_io_uring_queue_async_work(req, io_wq_is_hashed(&req->work));
@@ -1254,7 +1255,8 @@ static void io_req_normal_work_add(struct io_kiocb *req)
return;
}
- if (likely(!task_work_add(tctx->task, &tctx->task_work, ctx->notify_method)))
+ if (!percpu_ref_is_dying(&ctx->refs) &&
+ !task_work_add(tctx->task, &tctx->task_work, ctx->notify_method))
return;
io_fallback_tw(tctx, false);
--
Pavel Begunkov
