lists.openwall.net | lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC | |
Open Source and information security mailing list archives
| ||
|
Date: Mon, 2 Mar 2020 08:12:44 -0700 From: Jens Axboe <axboe@...nel.dk> To: Pavel Begunkov <asml.silence@...il.com>, io-uring@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH 9/9] io_uring: pass submission ref to async On 3/2/20 8:08 AM, Pavel Begunkov wrote: > On 3/2/2020 12:39 AM, Pavel Begunkov wrote: >> On 01/03/2020 19:18, Pavel Begunkov wrote: >>> Currenlty, every async work handler accepts a submission reference, >>> which it should put. Also there is a reference grabbed in io_get_work() >>> and dropped in io_put_work(). This patch merge them together. >>> >>> - So, ownership of the submission reference passed to io-wq, and it'll >>> be put in io_put_work(). >>> - io_get_put() doesn't take a ref now and so deleted. >>> - async handlers don't put the submission ref anymore. >>> - make cancellation bits of io-wq to call {get,put}_work() handlers >> >> Hmm, it makes them more like {init,fini}_work() and unbalanced/unpaired. May be >> no a desirable thing. > > Any objections against replacing {get,put}_work() with > io_finilise_work()? It will be called once and only once, and a work > must not go away until it happened. It will be enough for now, but not > sure whether you have some plans for this get/put pinning. I have no further plans there, the get/put work only exist to ensure that the work item stays valid in case of cancelation lookups. -- Jens Axboe
Powered by blists - more mailing lists