On Wed, Jan 2, 2019 at 10:14 AM Jens Axboe <axboe@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> Note that the blk-mq hunk is fine, since that's ONLY used for polling.
Actually, it's fine for another reason too: using
"__set_current_state()" is always safe when the state you're setting
things to is TASK_RUNNING. Even if there's a concurrent wakeup, that's
only going to set things running anyway, so there's no race.
But yes, if something is truly just polling, then it shouldn't touch
the task state at all.
That said, some of the "polling" code looks mis-named. For example,
the blk_poll() call in mm/page_io.c looks like it's polling, but it
can actually sleep (ie blk_mq_poll_hybrid() gets called even when
"spin" is true).
But the sleeping case looks like it handles the task state thing on
its own, so all those polling codepaths should probably be inspected.
In the meantime, the attached is what I committed.
Linus
commit 1ac5cd4978794bd060d448acc0305e9fc996ba92
Author: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Wed Jan 2 10:46:03 2019 -0800
block: don't use un-ordered __set_current_state(TASK_UNINTERRUPTIBLE)
This mostly reverts commit 849a370016a5 ("block: avoid ordered task
state change for polled IO"). It was wrongly claiming that the ordering
wasn't necessary. The memory barrier _is_ necessary.
If something is truly polling and not going to sleep, it's the whole
state setting that is unnecessary, not the memory barrier. Whenever you
set your state to a sleeping state, you absolutely need the memory
barrier.
Note that sometimes the memory barrier can be elsewhere. For example,
the ordering might be provided by an external lock, or by setting the
process state to sleeping before adding yourself to the wait queue list
that is used for waking up (where the wait queue lock itself will
guarantee that any wakeup will correctly see the sleeping state).
But none of those cases were true here.
NOTE! Some of the polling paths may indeed be able to drop the state
setting entirely, at which point the memory barrier also goes away.
(Also note that this doesn't revert the TASK_RUNNING cases: there is no
race between a wakeup and setting the process state to TASK_RUNNING,
since the end result doesn't depend on ordering).
Cc: Jens Axboe <axboe@xxxxxxxxx>
Cc: Christoph Hellwig <hch@xxxxxx>
Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
diff --git a/fs/block_dev.c b/fs/block_dev.c
index 450be88cffef..c546cdce77e6 100644
--- a/fs/block_dev.c
+++ b/fs/block_dev.c
@@ -237,11 +237,9 @@ __blkdev_direct_IO_simple(struct kiocb *iocb, struct iov_iter *iter,
qc = submit_bio(&bio);
for (;;) {
- __set_current_state(TASK_UNINTERRUPTIBLE);
-
+ set_current_state(TASK_UNINTERRUPTIBLE);
if (!READ_ONCE(bio.bi_private))
break;
-
if (!(iocb->ki_flags & IOCB_HIPRI) ||
!blk_poll(bdev_get_queue(bdev), qc, true))
io_schedule();
@@ -426,8 +424,7 @@ __blkdev_direct_IO(struct kiocb *iocb, struct iov_iter *iter, int nr_pages)
return -EIOCBQUEUED;
for (;;) {
- __set_current_state(TASK_UNINTERRUPTIBLE);
-
+ set_current_state(TASK_UNINTERRUPTIBLE);
if (!READ_ONCE(dio->waiter))
break;
diff --git a/fs/iomap.c b/fs/iomap.c
index 3a0cd557b4cf..a3088fae567b 100644
--- a/fs/iomap.c
+++ b/fs/iomap.c
@@ -1921,8 +1921,7 @@ iomap_dio_rw(struct kiocb *iocb, struct iov_iter *iter,
return -EIOCBQUEUED;
for (;;) {
- __set_current_state(TASK_UNINTERRUPTIBLE);
-
+ set_current_state(TASK_UNINTERRUPTIBLE);
if (!READ_ONCE(dio->submit.waiter))
break;
diff --git a/mm/page_io.c b/mm/page_io.c
index 3475733b1926..d975fa3f02aa 100644
--- a/mm/page_io.c
+++ b/mm/page_io.c
@@ -405,8 +405,7 @@ int swap_readpage(struct page *page, bool synchronous)
bio_get(bio);
qc = submit_bio(bio);
while (synchronous) {
- __set_current_state(TASK_UNINTERRUPTIBLE);
-
+ set_current_state(TASK_UNINTERRUPTIBLE);
if (!READ_ONCE(bio->bi_private))
break;
