On 10/26/20 9:09 PM, [email protected] wrote:
> From: Zqiang <[email protected]>
>
> In 'io_wqe_worker' thread, if the work which in 'wqe->work_list' be
> finished, the 'wqe->work_list' is empty, and after that the
> '__io_worker_idle' func return false, the task state is TASK_RUNNING,
> need to be set TASK_INTERRUPTIBLE before call schedule_timeout func.
I don't think that's safe - what if someone added work right before you
call schedule_timeout_interruptible? Something ala:
io_wq_enqueue()
set_current_state(TASK_INTERRUPTIBLE();
schedule_timeout(WORKER_IDLE_TIMEOUT);
then we'll have work added and the task state set to running, but the
worker itself just sets us to non-running and will hence wait
WORKER_IDLE_TIMEOUT before the work is processed.
The current situation will do one extra loop for this case, as the
schedule_timeout() just ends up being a nop and we go around again
checking for work. Since we already unused the mm, the next iteration
will go to sleep properly unless new work came in.
--
Jens Axboe
