Re: [PATCH v3 06/13] epoll: introduce helpers for adding/removing events to uring

[Peter Zijlstra]

On Thu, May 16, 2019 at 10:58:03AM +0200, Roman Penyaev wrote:
> +static inline bool ep_add_event_to_uring(struct epitem *epi, __poll_t pollflags)
> +{
> +	struct eventpoll *ep = epi->ep;
> +	struct epoll_uitem *uitem;
> +	bool added = false;
> +
> +	if (WARN_ON(!pollflags))
> +		return false;
> +
> +	uitem = &ep->user_header->items[epi->bit];
> +	/*
> +	 * Can be represented as:
> +	 *
> +	 *    was_ready = uitem->ready_events;
> +	 *    uitem->ready_events &= ~EPOLLREMOVED;
> +	 *    uitem->ready_events |= pollflags;
> +	 *    if (!was_ready) {
> +	 *         // create index entry
> +	 *    }
> +	 *
> +	 * See the big comment inside ep_remove_user_item(), why it is
> +	 * important to mask EPOLLREMOVED.
> +	 */
> +	if (!atomic_or_with_mask(&uitem->ready_events,
> +				 pollflags, EPOLLREMOVED)) {
> +		unsigned int i, *item_idx, index_mask;
> +
> +		/*
> +		 * Item was not ready before, thus we have to insert
> +		 * new index to the ring.
> +		 */
> +
> +		index_mask = ep_max_index_nr(ep) - 1;
> +		i = __atomic_fetch_add(&ep->user_header->tail, 1,
> +				       __ATOMIC_ACQUIRE);

afaict __atomic_fetch_add() does not exist.

> +		item_idx = &ep->user_index[i & index_mask];
> +
> +		/* Signal with a bit, which is > 0 */
> +		*item_idx = epi->bit + 1;

Did you just increment the user visible tail pointer before you filled
the data? That is, can the concurrent userspace observe the increment
before you put credible data in its place?

> +
> +		/*
> +		 * Want index update be flushed from CPU write buffer and
> +		 * immediately visible on userspace side to avoid long busy
> +		 * loops.
> +		 */
> +		smp_wmb();

That's still complete nonsense.

> +
> +		added = true;
> +	}
> +
> +	return added;
> +}