Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel+bounces-168143-linux.lists.archive=gmail.com@vger.kernel.org designates 139.178.88.99 as permitted sender) client-ip=139.178.88.99;
Message-ID: <0f9c6f92-7160-46b1-86ee-2a4233c7860f@kernel.dk>
Date: Fri, 3 May 2024 13:36:38 -0600
Precedence: bulk
MIME-Version: 1.0
User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird
Subject: Re: [PATCH] io_uring/io-wq: Use set_bit() and test_bit() at
 worker->flags
To: Christophe JAILLET <christophe.jaillet@wanadoo.fr>,
 Breno Leitao <leitao@debian.org>, Pavel Begunkov <asml.silence@gmail.com>
Cc: leit@meta.com, "open list:IO_URING" <io-uring@vger.kernel.org>,
 open list <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
References: <20240503173711.2211911-1-leitao@debian.org>
 <b5f7b99c-053d-4df5-9b2b-aaca48e6f7bd@kernel.dk>
 <75ae8634-72ad-4c6f-92af-76eaa1d3b1d9@wanadoo.fr>
Content-Language: en-US
From: Jens Axboe <axboe@kernel.dk>
In-Reply-To: <75ae8634-72ad-4c6f-92af-76eaa1d3b1d9@wanadoo.fr>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

On 5/3/24 1:24 PM, Christophe JAILLET wrote:
> Le 03/05/2024 ? 20:41, Jens Axboe a ?crit :
>> On 5/3/24 11:37 AM, Breno Leitao wrote:
>>> @@ -631,7 +631,8 @@ static int io_wq_worker(void *data)
>>>       bool exit_mask = false, last_timeout = false;
>>>       char buf[TASK_COMM_LEN];
>>>   -    worker->flags |= (IO_WORKER_F_UP | IO_WORKER_F_RUNNING);
>>> +    set_bit(IO_WORKER_F_UP, &worker->flags);
>>> +    set_bit(IO_WORKER_F_RUNNING, &worker->flags);
>>
>> You could probably just use WRITE_ONCE() here with the mask, as it's
>> setup side.
>>
> 
> Or simply:
>    set_mask_bits(&worker->flags, 0, IO_WORKER_F_UP | IO_WORKER_F_RUNNING);

Looks like overkill, as we don't really need that kind of assurances
here. WRITE_ONCE should be fine. Not that it _really_ matters as it's
not a performance critical part, but it also sends wrong hints to the
reader of the code on which kind of guarantees are needing here.

-- 
Jens Axboe