linux-kernel - Re: [RFC 4/4] io_uring: implement futex wait

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

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <409a624c-de75-0ee5-b65f-ee09fff34809@gmail.com>
Date:   Tue, 1 Jun 2021 16:58:22 +0100
From:   Pavel Begunkov <asml.silence@...il.com>
To:     Jens Axboe <axboe@...nel.dk>, io-uring@...r.kernel.org
Cc:     Andres Freund <andres@...razel.de>,
        Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
        Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>,
        Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
        Darren Hart <dvhart@...radead.org>,
        Davidlohr Bueso <dave@...olabs.net>,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [RFC 4/4] io_uring: implement futex wait

On 6/1/21 4:45 PM, Jens Axboe wrote:
> On 6/1/21 8:58 AM, Pavel Begunkov wrote:
>> Add futex wait requests, those always go through io-wq for simplicity.
> 
> Not a huge fan of that, I think this should tap into the waitqueue
> instead and just rely on the wakeup callback to trigger the event. That
> would be a lot more efficient than punting to io-wq, both in terms of
> latency on trigger, but also for efficiency if the app is waiting on a
> lot of futexes.

Yes, that would be preferable, but looks futexes don't use
waitqueues but some manual enqueuing into a plist_node, see
futex_wait_queue_me() or mark_wake_futex().
Did I miss it somewhere?

-- 
Pavel Begunkov