On 4/4/24 1:06 AM, Jiri Slaby wrote: > On 02. 04. 24, 15:41, Jens Axboe wrote: >> On 4/2/24 2:12 AM, Jiri Slaby wrote: >>> On 24. 03. 24, 23:23, Sasha Levin wrote: >>>> From: Jens Axboe <axboe@xxxxxxxxx> >>>> >>>> [ Upstream commit 9fe3eaea4a3530ca34a8d8ff00b1848c528789ca ] >>>> >>>> If we have a ton of notifications coming in, we can be looping in here >>>> for a long time. This can be problematic for various reasons, mostly >>>> because we can starve userspace. If the application is waiting on N >>>> events, then only re-run if we need more events. >>> >>> This commit breaks test/recv-multishot.c from liburing: >>> early error: res 4 >>> test stream=1 wait_each=0 recvmsg=0 early_error=0 defer=1 failed >>> >>> The behaviour is the same in 6.9-rc2 (which contains the commit too). >>> >>> Reverting the commit on the top of 6.8.2 makes it pass again. >>> >>> Should the test be updated or is the commit wrong? >> >> The commit is fine, it's the test that is buggy. Sometimes test cases >> make odd assumptions that are just wrong but happen to work, for some >> definition of work. Eg it would work fine on an idle system, but not >> necessarily if not. For this one, the fix is in liburing: >> >> https://git.kernel.dk/cgit/liburing/commit/test/recv-multishot.c?id=a1d5e4b863a60af93d0cab9d4bbf578733337a90 > > Thanks, that worked. > > Any plans to release 2.6 with the above? > > Note that for 2.4->2.5 update I also needed to take 9dc95a03e4a76 from > post-2.5. Yep, 2.6 should be released very soon. -- Jens Axboe
