Re: [CFT][PATCH v3] fork, vhost: Use CLONE_THREAD to fix freezer/ps regression

[Oleg Nesterov]

On 06/06, Mike Christie wrote:
>
> On 6/6/23 7:16 AM, Oleg Nesterov wrote:
> > On 06/05, Mike Christie wrote:
> >
> >> So it works like if we were using a kthread still:
> >>
> >> 1. Userapce thread0 opens /dev/vhost-$something.
> >> 2. thread0 does VHOST_SET_OWNER ioctl. This calls vhost_task_create() to
> >> create the task_struct which runs the vhost_worker() function which handles
> >> the work->fns.
> >> 3. If userspace now does a SIGKILL or just exits without doing a close() on
> >> /dev/vhost-$something, then when thread0 does exit_files() that will do the
> >> fput that does vhost-$something's file_operations->release.
> >
> > So, at least in this simple case vhost_worker() can just exit after SIGKILL,
> > and thread0 can flush the outstanding commands when it calls vhost_dev_flush()
> > rather than wait for vhost_worker().
> >
> > Right?
>
> With the current code, the answer is no. We would hang like I mentioned here:
>
> https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/ae250076-7d55-c407-1066-86b37014c69c@xxxxxxxxxx/

If only I could fully understand this email ;)

Could you spell to explain why this can't work (again, in this simple case) ?

My current (and I know, very poor) understanding is that .release() should
roughly do the following:

	1. Ensure that vhost_work_queue() can't add the new callbacks

	2. Call vhost_dev_flush() to ensure that worker->work_list is empty

	3. Call vhost_task_stop()

so why this sequence can't work if we turn vhost_dev_flush() into something like

	void vhost_dev_flush(struct vhost_dev *dev)
	{
		struct vhost_flush_struct flush;

		if (dev->worker) {
			// this assumes that vhost_task_create() uses CLONE_THREAD
			if (same_thread_group(current, dev->worker->vtsk->task)) {
				... run the pending callbacks ...
				return;
			}


			// this is what we currently have

			init_completion(&flush.wait_event);
			vhost_work_init(&flush.work, vhost_flush_work);

			vhost_work_queue(dev, &flush.work);
			wait_for_completion(&flush.wait_event);
		}
	}

?

Mike, I am just trying to understand what exactly vhost_worker() should do.

> We need to add code like I mentioned in that reply because we don't have a
> way to call into the layers below us to flush those commands.

This tells me nothing, but this is my fault, not yours. Again, again, I know
nothing about drivers/vhost.

Oleg.