[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <810d45da-7d60-460a-a250-eacf07f3d005@gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 29 Oct 2025 15:22:52 +0000
From: Pavel Begunkov <asml.silence@...il.com>
To: David Wei <dw@...idwei.uk>, io-uring@...r.kernel.org,
netdev@...r.kernel.org
Cc: Jens Axboe <axboe@...nel.dk>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 7/8] io_uring/zcrx: add refcount to ifq and remove
ifq->ctx
On 10/28/25 17:46, David Wei wrote:
> Add a refcount to struct io_zcrx_ifq to track the number of rings that
> share it. For now, this is only ever 1 i.e. not shared.
>
> This refcount replaces the ref that the ifq holds on ctx->refs via the
> page pool memory provider. This was used to keep the ifq around until
> the ring ctx is being freed i.e. ctx->refs fall to 0. But with ifq now
> being refcounted directly by the ring, and ifq->ctx removed, this is no
> longer necessary.
>
> Since ifqs now no longer hold refs to ring ctx, there isn't a need to
> split the cleanup of ifqs into two: io_shutdown_zcrx_ifqs() in
> io_ring_exit_work() while waiting for ctx->refs to drop to 0, and
> io_unregister_zcrx_ifqs() after. Remove io_shutdown_zcrx_ifqs().
>
> So an ifq now behaves like a normal refcounted object; the last ref from
> a ring will free the ifq.
>
> Signed-off-by: David Wei <dw@...idwei.uk>
> ---
> io_uring/io_uring.c | 5 -----
> io_uring/zcrx.c | 24 +++++-------------------
> io_uring/zcrx.h | 6 +-----
> 3 files changed, 6 insertions(+), 29 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/io_uring/io_uring.c b/io_uring/io_uring.c
> index 7d42748774f8..8af5efda9c11 100644
> --- a/io_uring/io_uring.c
> +++ b/io_uring/io_uring.c
> @@ -3042,11 +3042,6 @@ static __cold void io_ring_exit_work(struct work_struct *work)
> io_cqring_overflow_kill(ctx);
> mutex_unlock(&ctx->uring_lock);
> }
> - if (!xa_empty(&ctx->zcrx_ctxs)) {
> - mutex_lock(&ctx->uring_lock);
> - io_shutdown_zcrx_ifqs(ctx);
> - mutex_unlock(&ctx->uring_lock);
> - }
>
> if (ctx->flags & IORING_SETUP_DEFER_TASKRUN)
> io_move_task_work_from_local(ctx);
> diff --git a/io_uring/zcrx.c b/io_uring/zcrx.c
> index b3f3d55d2f63..6324dfa61ce0 100644
> --- a/io_uring/zcrx.c
> +++ b/io_uring/zcrx.c
> @@ -479,7 +479,6 @@ static struct io_zcrx_ifq *io_zcrx_ifq_alloc(struct io_ring_ctx *ctx)
> return NULL;
>
> ifq->if_rxq = -1;
> - ifq->ctx = ctx;
> spin_lock_init(&ifq->rq_lock);
> mutex_init(&ifq->pp_lock);
> return ifq;
> @@ -592,6 +591,7 @@ int io_register_zcrx_ifq(struct io_ring_ctx *ctx,
> ifq = io_zcrx_ifq_alloc(ctx);
> if (!ifq)
> return -ENOMEM;
> + refcount_set(&ifq->refs, 1);
> if (ctx->user) {
> get_uid(ctx->user);
> ifq->user = ctx->user;
> @@ -714,19 +714,6 @@ static void io_zcrx_scrub(struct io_zcrx_ifq *ifq)
> }
> }
>
> -void io_shutdown_zcrx_ifqs(struct io_ring_ctx *ctx)
> -{
> - struct io_zcrx_ifq *ifq;
> - unsigned long index;
> -
> - lockdep_assert_held(&ctx->uring_lock);
> -
> - xa_for_each(&ctx->zcrx_ctxs, index, ifq) {
> - io_zcrx_scrub(ifq);
> - io_close_queue(ifq);
> - }
> -}
> -
> void io_unregister_zcrx_ifqs(struct io_ring_ctx *ctx)
> {
> struct io_zcrx_ifq *ifq;
> @@ -743,7 +730,10 @@ void io_unregister_zcrx_ifqs(struct io_ring_ctx *ctx)
> }
> if (!ifq)
> break;
> - io_zcrx_ifq_free(ifq);
> + if (refcount_dec_and_test(&ifq->refs)) {
> + io_zcrx_scrub(ifq);
> + io_zcrx_ifq_free(ifq);
> + }
> }
>
> xa_destroy(&ctx->zcrx_ctxs);
> @@ -894,15 +884,11 @@ static int io_pp_zc_init(struct page_pool *pp)
> if (ret)
> return ret;
>
> - percpu_ref_get(&ifq->ctx->refs);
> return 0;
refcount_inc();
> }
>
> static void io_pp_zc_destroy(struct page_pool *pp)
> {
> - struct io_zcrx_ifq *ifq = io_pp_to_ifq(pp);
> -
> - percpu_ref_put(&ifq->ctx->refs);
refcount_dec_and_test + destroy. Otherwise, seems like
nothing protects it from going away under pp.
--
Pavel Begunkov
Powered by blists - more mailing lists