[resend due to me forgetting to cc: linux-api the first time around I
posted these back on Feb 23]
From: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
For some reason these values are not in the uapi header file, so any
libc has to define it themselves. To prevent them from needing to do
this, just have the kernel provide the correct values.
Reported-by: Elliott Hughes <enh@google.com>
Signed-off-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
[resend due to me forgetting to cc: linux-api the first time around I
posted these back on Feb 23]
From: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
When userspace tries to use these defines, it complains that it needs to
be an unsigned 1 that is shifted, so libc implementations have to create
their own version. Fix this by defining it properly so that libcs can
just use the kernel uapi header.
Reported-by: Elliott Hughes <enh@google.com>
Signed-off-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
Currently, epoll file descriptors or epfds (the fd returned from
epoll_create[1]()) that are added to a shared wakeup source are always
added in a non-exclusive manner. This means that when we have multiple
epfds attached to a shared fd source they are all woken up. This creates
thundering herd type behavior.
Introduce a new 'EPOLLEXCLUSIVE' flag that can be passed as part of the
'event' argument during an epoll_ctl() EPOLL_CTL_ADD operation. This new
flag allows for exclusive wakeups when there are multiple epfds attached
to a shared fd event source.
The implementation walks the list of exclusive waiters, and queues an
event to each epfd, until it finds the first waiter that has threads
blocked on it via epoll_wait(). The idea is to search for threads which
are idle and ready to process the wakeup events. Thus, we queue an event
to at least 1 epfd, but may still potentially queue an event to all epfds
that are attached to the shared fd source.
Performance testing was done by Madars Vitolins using a modified version
of Enduro/X. The use of the 'EPOLLEXCLUSIVE' flag reduce the length of
this particular workload from 860s down to 24s.
Sample epoll_clt text:
EPOLLEXCLUSIVE
Sets an exclusive wakeup mode for the epfd file descriptor that is
being attached to the target file descriptor, fd. Thus, when an event
occurs and multiple epfd file descriptors are attached to the same
target file using EPOLLEXCLUSIVE, one or more epfds will receive an
event with epoll_wait(2). The default in this scenario (when
EPOLLEXCLUSIVE is not set) is for all epfds to receive an event.
EPOLLEXCLUSIVE may only be specified with the op EPOLL_CTL_ADD.
Signed-off-by: Jason Baron <jbaron@akamai.com>
Tested-by: Madars Vitolins <m@silodev.com>
Cc: Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>
Cc: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
Cc: Al Viro <viro@ftp.linux.org.uk>
Cc: Michael Kerrisk <mtk.manpages@gmail.com>
Cc: Eric Wong <normalperson@yhbt.net>
Cc: Jonathan Corbet <corbet@lwn.net>
Cc: Andy Lutomirski <luto@amacapital.net>
Cc: Hagen Paul Pfeifer <hagen@jauu.net>
Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
Drop EPOLLWAKEUP from epoll events mask if CONFIG_PM_SLEEP is disabled.
Signed-off-by: Amit Pundir <amit.pundir@linaro.org>
Cc: John Stultz <john.stultz@linaro.org>
Cc: Alexander Viro <viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk>
Signed-off-by: Rafael J. Wysocki <rafael.j.wysocki@intel.com>
Revert commit 03a7beb55b ("epoll: support for disabling items, and a
self-test app") pending resolution of the issues identified by Michael
Kerrisk, copied below.
We'll revisit this for 3.8.
: I've taken a look at this patch as it currently stands in 3.7-rc1, and
: done a bit of testing. (By the way, the test program
: tools/testing/selftests/epoll/test_epoll.c does not compile...)
:
: There are one or two places where the behavior seems a little strange,
: so I have a question or two at the end of this mail. But other than
: that, I want to check my understanding so that the interface can be
: correctly documented.
:
: Just to go though my understanding, the problem is the following
: scenario in a multithreaded application:
:
: 1. Multiple threads are performing epoll_wait() operations,
: and maintaining a user-space cache that contains information
: corresponding to each file descriptor being monitored by
: epoll_wait().
:
: 2. At some point, a thread wants to delete (EPOLL_CTL_DEL)
: a file descriptor from the epoll interest list, and
: delete the corresponding record from the user-space cache.
:
: 3. The problem with (2) is that some other thread may have
: previously done an epoll_wait() that retrieved information
: about the fd in question, and may be in the middle of using
: information in the cache that relates to that fd. Thus,
: there is a potential race.
:
: 4. The race can't solved purely in user space, because doing
: so would require applying a mutex across the epoll_wait()
: call, which would of course blow thread concurrency.
:
: Right?
:
: Your solution is the EPOLL_CTL_DISABLE operation. I want to
: confirm my understanding about how to use this flag, since
: the description that has accompanied the patches so far
: has been a bit sparse
:
: 0. In the scenario you're concerned about, deleting a file
: descriptor means (safely) doing the following:
: (a) Deleting the file descriptor from the epoll interest list
: using EPOLL_CTL_DEL
: (b) Deleting the corresponding record in the user-space cache
:
: 1. It's only meaningful to use this EPOLL_CTL_DISABLE in
: conjunction with EPOLLONESHOT.
:
: 2. Using EPOLL_CTL_DISABLE without using EPOLLONESHOT in
: conjunction is a logical error.
:
: 3. The correct way to code multithreaded applications using
: EPOLL_CTL_DISABLE and EPOLLONESHOT is as follows:
:
: a. All EPOLL_CTL_ADD and EPOLL_CTL_MOD operations should
: should EPOLLONESHOT.
:
: b. When a thread wants to delete a file descriptor, it
: should do the following:
:
: [1] Call epoll_ctl(EPOLL_CTL_DISABLE)
: [2] If the return status from epoll_ctl(EPOLL_CTL_DISABLE)
: was zero, then the file descriptor can be safely
: deleted by the thread that made this call.
: [3] If the epoll_ctl(EPOLL_CTL_DISABLE) fails with EBUSY,
: then the descriptor is in use. In this case, the calling
: thread should set a flag in the user-space cache to
: indicate that the thread that is using the descriptor
: should perform the deletion operation.
:
: Is all of the above correct?
:
: The implementation depends on checking on whether
: (events & ~EP_PRIVATE_BITS) == 0
: This replies on the fact that EPOLL_CTL_AD and EPOLL_CTL_MOD always
: set EPOLLHUP and EPOLLERR in the 'events' mask, and EPOLLONESHOT
: causes those flags (as well as all others in ~EP_PRIVATE_BITS) to be
: cleared.
:
: A corollary to the previous paragraph is that using EPOLL_CTL_DISABLE
: is only useful in conjunction with EPOLLONESHOT. However, as things
: stand, one can use EPOLL_CTL_DISABLE on a file descriptor that does
: not have EPOLLONESHOT set in 'events' This results in the following
: (slightly surprising) behavior:
:
: (a) The first call to epoll_ctl(EPOLL_CTL_DISABLE) returns 0
: (the indicator that the file descriptor can be safely deleted).
: (b) The next call to epoll_ctl(EPOLL_CTL_DISABLE) fails with EBUSY.
:
: This doesn't seem particularly useful, and in fact is probably an
: indication that the user made a logic error: they should only be using
: epoll_ctl(EPOLL_CTL_DISABLE) on a file descriptor for which
: EPOLLONESHOT was set in 'events'. If that is correct, then would it
: not make sense to return an error to user space for this case?
Cc: Michael Kerrisk <mtk.manpages@gmail.com>
Cc: "Paton J. Lewis" <palewis@adobe.com>
Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
Signed-off-by: David Howells <dhowells@redhat.com>
Acked-by: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>
Acked-by: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
Acked-by: Michael Kerrisk <mtk.manpages@gmail.com>
Acked-by: Paul E. McKenney <paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
Acked-by: Dave Jones <davej@redhat.com>
