[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.64.0703141638570.4982@alien.or.mcafeemobile.com>
Date: Wed, 14 Mar 2007 16:41:58 -0700 (PDT)
From: Davide Libenzi <davidel@...ilserver.org>
To: Benjamin LaHaise <bcrl@...ck.org>
cc: Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>,
Suparna Bhattacharya <suparna@...ibm.com>,
Zach Brown <zach.brown@...cle.com>
Subject: Re: [patch 13/13] signalfd/timerfd/asyncfd v5 - KAIO asyncfd support
(example/maybe-broken) ...
On Wed, 14 Mar 2007, Benjamin LaHaise wrote:
> On Wed, Mar 14, 2007 at 04:24:54PM -0700, Davide Libenzi wrote:
> > Can you point me to a kernel path that ends up calling aio_complete() in a
> > do-not-sleep mode?
>
> If you remove that invariant, then it is very difficult for device drivers
> and other code to make use of aio_complete().
>
> > The offender I see is drivers/usb/gadget/inode.c that calls it with a
> > spinlock held.
>
> Which was from irq context last time I checked.
>
> > The aio_run_iocb function seem to release/reacquire the lock before
> > calling aio_complete().
>
> That implies nothing -- aio_complete() has to acquire ctx_lock and cannot
> be called holding the lock. Sure, it could probably be split into
> __aio_complete() and have aio_complete() wrap it acquiring the lock.
Yeah, of course. I do not plan revolutions. Just asking if it's a possible
thing to do. I can mlock the userspace ring, if imposing that burden over
aio_complete() is seen as too heavy.
- Davide
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists