mirror of https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Christian Brauner <brauner@kernel.org>
To: Joe Damato <jdamato@fastly.com>
Cc: linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, jack@suse.cz,
	 Alexander Viro <viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk>,
	"David S. Miller" <davem@davemloft.net>,
	 Eric Dumazet <edumazet@google.com>,
	Sridhar Samudrala <sridhar.samudrala@intel.com>,
	 Alexander Duyck <alexander.h.duyck@intel.com>,
	open list <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH vfs/vfs.fixes v2] eventpoll: Set epoll timeout if it's in the future
Date: Sat, 26 Apr 2025 14:29:15 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20250426-haben-redeverbot-0b58878ac722@brauner> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20250416185826.26375-1-jdamato@fastly.com>

On Wed, Apr 16, 2025 at 06:58:25PM +0000, Joe Damato wrote:
> Avoid an edge case where epoll_wait arms a timer and calls schedule()
> even if the timer will expire immediately.
> 
> For example: if the user has specified an epoll busy poll usecs which is
> equal or larger than the epoll_wait/epoll_pwait2 timeout, it is
> unnecessary to call schedule_hrtimeout_range; the busy poll usecs have
> consumed the entire timeout duration so it is unnecessary to induce
> scheduling latency by calling schedule() (via schedule_hrtimeout_range).
> 
> This can be measured using a simple bpftrace script:
> 
> tracepoint:sched:sched_switch
> / args->prev_pid == $1 /
> {
>   print(kstack());
>   print(ustack());
> }
> 
> Before this patch is applied:
> 
>   Testing an epoll_wait app with busy poll usecs set to 1000, and
>   epoll_wait timeout set to 1ms using the script above shows:
> 
>      __traceiter_sched_switch+69
>      __schedule+1495
>      schedule+32
>      schedule_hrtimeout_range+159
>      do_epoll_wait+1424
>      __x64_sys_epoll_wait+97
>      do_syscall_64+95
>      entry_SYSCALL_64_after_hwframe+118
> 
>      epoll_wait+82
> 
>   Which is unexpected; the busy poll usecs should have consumed the
>   entire timeout and there should be no reason to arm a timer.
> 
> After this patch is applied: the same test scenario does not generate a
> call to schedule() in the above edge case. If the busy poll usecs are
> reduced (for example usecs: 100, epoll_wait timeout 1ms) the timer is
> armed as expected.
> 
> Fixes: bf3b9f6372c4 ("epoll: Add busy poll support to epoll with socket fds.")
> Signed-off-by: Joe Damato <jdamato@fastly.com>
> Reviewed-by: Jan Kara <jack@suse.cz>
> ---
>  v2: 
>    - No longer an RFC and rebased on vfs/vfs.fixes
>    - Added Jan's Reviewed-by
>    - Added Fixes tag
>    - No functional changes from the RFC
> 
>  rfcv1: https://lore.kernel.org/linux-fsdevel/20250415184346.39229-1-jdamato@fastly.com/
> 
>  fs/eventpoll.c | 10 +++++++++-
>  1 file changed, 9 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
> 
> diff --git a/fs/eventpoll.c b/fs/eventpoll.c
> index 100376863a44..4bc264b854c4 100644
> --- a/fs/eventpoll.c
> +++ b/fs/eventpoll.c
> @@ -1996,6 +1996,14 @@ static int ep_try_send_events(struct eventpoll *ep,
>  	return res;
>  }
>  
> +static int ep_schedule_timeout(ktime_t *to)
> +{
> +	if (to)
> +		return ktime_after(*to, ktime_get());
> +	else
> +		return 1;
> +}
> +
>  /**
>   * ep_poll - Retrieves ready events, and delivers them to the caller-supplied
>   *           event buffer.
> @@ -2103,7 +2111,7 @@ static int ep_poll(struct eventpoll *ep, struct epoll_event __user *events,
>  
>  		write_unlock_irq(&ep->lock);
>  
> -		if (!eavail)
> +		if (!eavail && ep_schedule_timeout(to))
>  			timed_out = !schedule_hrtimeout_range(to, slack,
>  							      HRTIMER_MODE_ABS);

Isn't this buggy? If @to is non-NULL and ep_schedule_timeout() returns
false you want to set timed_out to 1 to break the wait. Otherwise you
hang, no?

  parent reply	other threads:[~2025-04-26 12:29 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 11+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2025-04-16 18:58 Joe Damato
2025-04-17  7:56 ` Christian Brauner
2025-04-26 12:29 ` Christian Brauner [this message]
2025-04-28 12:14   ` Jan Kara
2025-04-28 13:18     ` Tudor Ambarus
2025-04-28 13:32       ` Tudor Ambarus
2025-04-28 16:50     ` Joe Damato
2025-04-28 22:32       ` Carlos Llamas
2025-04-28 22:41         ` Joe Damato
2025-04-29 10:19           ` Jan Kara
2025-04-29 11:08             ` Christian Brauner

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=20250426-haben-redeverbot-0b58878ac722@brauner \
    --to=brauner@kernel.org \
    --cc=alexander.h.duyck@intel.com \
    --cc=davem@davemloft.net \
    --cc=edumazet@google.com \
    --cc=jack@suse.cz \
    --cc=jdamato@fastly.com \
    --cc=linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=sridhar.samudrala@intel.com \
    --cc=viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox

all inboxes | Powered by JetHome®