You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
There is an acct->nr_worker visit without lock protection. Think about
the case: two callers call io_wqe_wake_worker(), one is the original
context and the other one is an io-worker(by calling
io_wqe_enqueue(wqe, linked)), on two cpus paralelly, this may cause
nr_worker to be larger than max_worker.
Let's fix it by adding lock for it, and let's do nr_workers++ before
create_io_worker. There may be a edge cause that the first caller fails
to create an io-worker, but the second caller doesn't know it and then
quit creating io-worker as well:
say nr_worker = max_worker - 1
cpu 0 cpu 1
io_wqe_wake_worker() io_wqe_wake_worker()
nr_worker < max_worker
nr_worker++
create_io_worker() nr_worker == max_worker
failed return
return
But the chance of this case is very slim.
Fixes: 685fe7f ("io-wq: eliminate the need for a manager thread")
Signed-off-by: Hao Xu <[email protected]>
[axboe: fix unconditional create_io_worker() call]
Signed-off-by: Jens Axboe <[email protected]>
0 commit comments