The patch titled
Subject: epoll: ensure ep_poll() doesn't miss wakeup events
has been removed from the -mm tree. Its filename was
epoll-ensure-ep_poll-doesnt-miss-wakeup-events.patch
This patch was dropped because it was withdrawn
------------------------------------------------------
From: Jason Baron <jbaron@xxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: epoll: ensure ep_poll() doesn't miss wakeup events
Now that the ep_events_available() check is done in a lockless way, and we
no longer perform wakeups from ep_scan_ready_list(), we need to ensure
that either ep->rdllist has items or the overflow list is active. Prior
to: commit 339ddb53d373 ("fs/epoll: remove unnecessary wakeups of nested
epoll"), we did wake_up(&ep->wq) after manipulating the ep->rdllist and
the overflow list. Thus, any waiters would observe the correct state.
However, with that wake_up() now removed we need to be more careful to
ensure that condition.
Here's an example of what could go wrong:
We have epoll fds: epfd1, epfd2. And epfd1 is added to epfd2 and epfd2 is
added to a socket: epfd1->epfd2->socket. Thread a is doing epoll_wait()
on epfd1, and thread b is doing epoll_wait on epfd2. Then:
1) data comes in on socket
ep_poll_callback() wakes up threads a and b
2) thread a runs
ep_poll()
ep_scan_ready_list()
ep_send_events_proc()
ep_item_poll()
ep_scan_ready_list()
list_splice_init(&ep->rdllist, &txlist);
3) now thread b is running
ep_poll()
ep_events_available()
returns false
schedule_hrtimeout_range()
Thus, thread b has now scheduled and missed the wakeup.
Link: http://lkml.kernel.org/r/1588360533-11828-1-git-send-email-jbaron@xxxxxxxxxx
Fixes: 339ddb53d373 ("fs/epoll: remove unnecessary wakeups of nested epoll")
Signed-off-by: Jason Baron <jbaron@xxxxxxxxxx>
Reviewed-by: Roman Penyaev <rpenyaev@xxxxxxx>
Cc: Alexander Viro <viro@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Cc: Heiher <r@xxxxxx>
Cc: Khazhismel Kumykov <khazhy@xxxxxxxxxx>
Cc: Davidlohr Bueso <dbueso@xxxxxxx>
Cc: <stable@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
---
fs/eventpoll.c | 23 +++++++++++++++++------
1 file changed, 17 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-)
--- a/fs/eventpoll.c~epoll-ensure-ep_poll-doesnt-miss-wakeup-events
+++ a/fs/eventpoll.c
@@ -704,8 +704,14 @@ static __poll_t ep_scan_ready_list(struc
* in a lockless way.
*/
write_lock_irq(&ep->lock);
- list_splice_init(&ep->rdllist, &txlist);
WRITE_ONCE(ep->ovflist, NULL);
+ /*
+ * In ep_poll() we use ep_events_available() in a lockless way to decide
+ * if events are available. So we need to preserve that either
+ * ep->oflist != EP_UNACTIVE_PTR or there are events on the ep->rdllist.
+ */
+ smp_wmb();
+ list_splice_init(&ep->rdllist, &txlist);
write_unlock_irq(&ep->lock);
/*
@@ -737,16 +743,21 @@ static __poll_t ep_scan_ready_list(struc
}
}
/*
+ * Quickly re-inject items left on "txlist".
+ */
+ list_splice(&txlist, &ep->rdllist);
+ /*
+ * In ep_poll() we use ep_events_available() in a lockless way to decide
+ * if events are available. So we need to preserve that either
+ * ep->oflist != EP_UNACTIVE_PTR or there are events on the ep->rdllist.
+ */
+ smp_wmb();
+ /*
* We need to set back ep->ovflist to EP_UNACTIVE_PTR, so that after
* releasing the lock, events will be queued in the normal way inside
* ep->rdllist.
*/
WRITE_ONCE(ep->ovflist, EP_UNACTIVE_PTR);
-
- /*
- * Quickly re-inject items left on "txlist".
- */
- list_splice(&txlist, &ep->rdllist);
__pm_relax(ep->ws);
write_unlock_irq(&ep->lock);
_
Patches currently in -mm which might be from jbaron@xxxxxxxxxx are
