LKML Archive on lore.kernel.org
help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: "Sébastien Dugué" <sebastien.dugue@bull.net>
To: Christoph Hellwig <hch@infradead.org>
Cc: linux-kernel <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
	linux-aio <linux-aio@kvack.org>, Andrew Morton <akpm@osdl.org>,
	Suparna Bhattacharya <suparna@in.ibm.com>,
	Christoph Hellwig <hch@infradead.org>,
	Zach Brown <zach.brown@oracle.com>,
	Badari Pulavarty <pbadari@us.ibm.com>,
	Ulrich Drepper <drepper@redhat.com>,
	Jean Pierre Dion <jean-pierre.dion@bull.net>
Subject: Re: [PATCH -mm 4/5][AIO] - AIO completion signal notification
Date: Wed, 29 Nov 2006 14:08:01 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20061129140801.1a509e37@frecb000686> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20061129105150.GB1773@infradead.org>

On Wed, 29 Nov 2006 10:51:50 +0000, Christoph Hellwig <hch@infradead.org> wrote:

> I'm a little bit unhappy about the usage of the notify flag.  The usage
> seems correct but very confusing:

  Well, I followed the logic from posix-timers.c, but it may be a poor
choice ;-)

  For a start, the SIGEV_* flags are quite confusing (for me at least).
SIGEV_SIGNAL is defined as 0, SIGEV_NONE as 1 and SIGEV_THREAD_ID as 4. I
would rather have seen SIGEV_NONE defined as 0 to avoid all this.

  I also wish I knew why those SIGEV_* constants were defined that way.

> 
> In io_submit_one we set ki_notify.notify to SIGEV_NONE and possibly
> call aio_setup_sigevent:
> 
> > +	/* handle setting up the sigevent for POSIX AIO signals */
> > +	req->ki_notify.notify = SIGEV_NONE;
> > +
> > +	if (iocb->aio_sigeventp) {
> > +		ret = aio_setup_sigevent(&req->ki_notify,
> > +					 (struct sigevent __user *)(unsigned
> > long)
> > +					 iocb->aio_sigeventp);
> > +		if (ret)
> > +			goto out_put_req;
> > +	}
> > +
> 
> aio_setup_sigevent then checks the user passed even for which notify type
> we have, and returns if it's none or otherwise sets notify->notify to it.
> 
> > +	if (event.sigev_notify == SIGEV_NONE)
> > +		return 0;
> > +
> > +	notify->notify = event.sigev_notify;
> 
> Later aio_setup_sigevent gets a reference to the target task_structure
> if notify->notify is (SIGEV_SIGNAL|SIGEV_THREAD_ID) but _always_ stores
> the target pointer.

  Yep, as SIGEV_SIGNAL is 0, this in fact checks that notify is SIGEV_THREAD_ID.
It could have been written as:

	if (notify->notify == SIGEV_THREAD_ID)

  And the target pointer is always store because at this point notify is either
SIGEV_SIGNAL or SIGEV_THREAD_ID.

> 
> > +	if (notify->notify == (SIGEV_SIGNAL|SIGEV_THREAD_ID)) {
> > +		/*
> > +		 * This reference will be dropped in really_put_req() when
> > +		 * we're done with the request.
> > +		 */
> > +		get_task_struct(target);
> > +	}
> > +
> > +	notify->target = target;
> 
> 
> Once we're done with the iocb aio_complete aclls aio_send_signal if
> notify.notify is not SIGEV_NONE.

  Again, if it's not SIGEV_NONE, then it's either SIGEV_SIGNAL or
SIGEV_THREAD_ID.

> 
> > +	if (iocb->ki_notify.notify != SIGEV_NONE) {
> > +		ret = aio_send_signal(&iocb->ki_notify);
> > +
> > +		/* If signal generation failed, release the sigqueue */
> > +		if (ret)
> > +			sigqueue_free(iocb->ki_notify.sigq);
> > +	}
> > +
> 
> Which then uses notify->target to send the signal:
> > +	if (notify->notify & SIGEV_THREAD_ID)
> > +		ret = send_sigqueue(notify->signo, sigq, notify->target);
> > +	else
> > +		ret = send_group_sigqueue(notify->signo, sigq, notify->target);
> 
> And finally really_put_req puts the target if notify.notify contains
> either SIGEV_SIGNAL or SIGEV_THREAD_ID.
> 
> > +	/* Release task ref */
> > +	if (req->ki_notify.notify == (SIGEV_SIGNAL|SIGEV_THREAD_ID))
> > +		put_task_struct(req->ki_notify.target);

  Could have been if (req->ki_notify.notify == SIGEV_THREAD_ID)

> 
> Do you see the confusing?  I think all the notify.notify != SIGEV_NONE
> in the above code should be replaces by the much more descriptive
> notify.notify == (SIGEV_SIGNAL|SIGEV_THREAD_ID). In addition we should
> only store the target pointer inside the (SIGEV_SIGNAL|SIGEV_THREAD_ID)
> if block that gets a reference to it.

  No, I don't think so, notify == (SIGEV_SIGNAL|SIGEV_THREAD_ID) really means
notify == SIGEV_THREAD_ID which leaves out notify == SIGEV_SIGNAL. Or
am I grossly mistaken?

  Thanks,

  Sébastien.



> -
> To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
> the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
> More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
> Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/

  reply	other threads:[~2006-11-29 13:07 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 29+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2006-11-29 10:24 [PATCH -mm 0/5][AIO] - AIO completion signal notification v3 Sébastien Dugué
2006-11-29 10:32 ` [PATCH -mm 1/5][AIO] - Rework compat_sys_io_submit Sébastien Dugué
2006-11-30  0:47   ` Zach Brown
2006-11-30  9:57     ` Sébastien Dugué
2006-11-30 17:27       ` Zach Brown
2006-11-29 10:32 ` [PATCH -mm 2/5][AIO] - fix aio.h includes Sébastien Dugué
2006-11-29 10:32 ` [PATCH -mm 3/5][AIO] - export good_sigevent() Sébastien Dugué
2006-11-29 10:38   ` Christoph Hellwig
2006-11-29 10:46     ` Sébastien Dugué
2006-11-29 14:54   ` Christoph Hellwig
2006-11-29 16:10     ` Sébastien Dugué
2006-12-04 17:13   ` Bharata B Rao
2006-12-05  8:30     ` Sébastien Dugué
2006-11-29 10:33 ` [PATCH -mm 4/5][AIO] - AIO completion signal notification Sébastien Dugué
2006-11-29 10:51   ` Christoph Hellwig
2006-11-29 13:08     ` Sébastien Dugué [this message]
2006-11-29 13:50       ` Christoph Hellwig
2006-11-29 14:18         ` Sébastien Dugué
2006-11-29 11:33   ` Jakub Jelinek
2006-11-29 13:25     ` Sébastien Dugué
2006-11-29 10:33 ` [PATCH -mm 5/5][AIO] - Listio support Sébastien Dugué
2006-11-30  8:25   ` Suparna Bhattacharya
2006-11-30 10:04     ` Sébastien Dugué
2006-11-30 15:38 [PATCH -mm 0/5][AIO] - AIO completion signal notification v4 Sébastien Dugué
2006-11-30 15:50 ` [PATCH -mm 4/5][AIO] - AIO completion signal notification Sébastien Dugué
     [not found] <20070117104601.36b2ab18@frecb000686>
2007-01-17  9:50 ` Sébastien Dugué
2007-01-24  5:35   ` Andrew Morton
2007-01-24 11:11     ` Sébastien Dugué
2007-01-25  5:42       ` Christoph Hellwig
2007-01-25  8:46         ` Sébastien Dugué

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=20061129140801.1a509e37@frecb000686 \
    --to=sebastien.dugue@bull.net \
    --cc=akpm@osdl.org \
    --cc=drepper@redhat.com \
    --cc=hch@infradead.org \
    --cc=jean-pierre.dion@bull.net \
    --cc=linux-aio@kvack.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=pbadari@us.ibm.com \
    --cc=suparna@in.ibm.com \
    --cc=zach.brown@oracle.com \
    --subject='Re: [PATCH -mm 4/5][AIO] - AIO completion signal notification' \
    /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

This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).