[PATCH RFC 1/2] sunrpc: delay pc_release callback until after sending a reply

Jeff Layton posted 2 patches 3 months ago
[PATCH RFC 1/2] sunrpc: delay pc_release callback until after sending a reply
Posted by Jeff Layton 3 months ago
The server-side sunrpc code currently calls pc_release before sending
the reply. A later nfsd patch will change some pc_release callbacks to
do extra work to clean the pagecache. There is no need to delay sending
the reply for this, however.

Change svc_process and svc_process_bc to call pc_release after sending
the reply instead of before.

Signed-off-by: Jeff Layton <jlayton@kernel.org>
---
 net/sunrpc/svc.c | 19 +++++++++++++++----
 1 file changed, 15 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)

diff --git a/net/sunrpc/svc.c b/net/sunrpc/svc.c
index b1fab3a6954437cf751e4725fa52cfc83eddf2ab..103bb6ba8e140fdccd6cab124e715caeb41bb445 100644
--- a/net/sunrpc/svc.c
+++ b/net/sunrpc/svc.c
@@ -1426,8 +1426,6 @@ svc_process_common(struct svc_rqst *rqstp)
 
 	/* Call the function that processes the request. */
 	rc = process.dispatch(rqstp);
-	if (procp->pc_release)
-		procp->pc_release(rqstp);
 	xdr_finish_decode(xdr);
 
 	if (!rc)
@@ -1526,6 +1524,14 @@ static void svc_drop(struct svc_rqst *rqstp)
 	trace_svc_drop(rqstp);
 }
 
+static void svc_release_rqst(struct svc_rqst *rqstp)
+{
+	const struct svc_procedure *procp = rqstp->rq_procinfo;
+
+	if (procp && procp->pc_release)
+		procp->pc_release(rqstp);
+}
+
 /**
  * svc_process - Execute one RPC transaction
  * @rqstp: RPC transaction context
@@ -1533,7 +1539,7 @@ static void svc_drop(struct svc_rqst *rqstp)
  */
 void svc_process(struct svc_rqst *rqstp)
 {
-	struct kvec		*resv = &rqstp->rq_res.head[0];
+	struct kvec			*resv = &rqstp->rq_res.head[0];
 	__be32 *p;
 
 #if IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_FAIL_SUNRPC)
@@ -1565,9 +1571,12 @@ void svc_process(struct svc_rqst *rqstp)
 	if (unlikely(*p != rpc_call))
 		goto out_baddir;
 
-	if (!svc_process_common(rqstp))
+	if (!svc_process_common(rqstp)) {
+		svc_release_rqst(rqstp);
 		goto out_drop;
+	}
 	svc_send(rqstp);
+	svc_release_rqst(rqstp);
 	return;
 
 out_baddir:
@@ -1635,6 +1644,7 @@ void svc_process_bc(struct rpc_rqst *req, struct svc_rqst *rqstp)
 	if (!proc_error) {
 		/* Processing error: drop the request */
 		xprt_free_bc_request(req);
+		svc_release_rqst(rqstp);
 		return;
 	}
 	/* Finally, send the reply synchronously */
@@ -1648,6 +1658,7 @@ void svc_process_bc(struct rpc_rqst *req, struct svc_rqst *rqstp)
 	timeout.to_maxval = timeout.to_initval;
 	memcpy(&req->rq_snd_buf, &rqstp->rq_res, sizeof(req->rq_snd_buf));
 	task = rpc_run_bc_task(req, &timeout);
+	svc_release_rqst(rqstp);
 
 	if (IS_ERR(task))
 		return;

-- 
2.50.0
Re: [PATCH RFC 1/2] sunrpc: delay pc_release callback until after sending a reply
Posted by NeilBrown 3 months ago
On Fri, 04 Jul 2025, Jeff Layton wrote:
> The server-side sunrpc code currently calls pc_release before sending
> the reply. A later nfsd patch will change some pc_release callbacks to
> do extra work to clean the pagecache. There is no need to delay sending
> the reply for this, however.
> 
> Change svc_process and svc_process_bc to call pc_release after sending
> the reply instead of before.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Jeff Layton <jlayton@kernel.org>
> ---
>  net/sunrpc/svc.c | 19 +++++++++++++++----
>  1 file changed, 15 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/net/sunrpc/svc.c b/net/sunrpc/svc.c
> index b1fab3a6954437cf751e4725fa52cfc83eddf2ab..103bb6ba8e140fdccd6cab124e715caeb41bb445 100644
> --- a/net/sunrpc/svc.c
> +++ b/net/sunrpc/svc.c
> @@ -1426,8 +1426,6 @@ svc_process_common(struct svc_rqst *rqstp)
>  
>  	/* Call the function that processes the request. */
>  	rc = process.dispatch(rqstp);
> -	if (procp->pc_release)
> -		procp->pc_release(rqstp);
>  	xdr_finish_decode(xdr);
>  
>  	if (!rc)
> @@ -1526,6 +1524,14 @@ static void svc_drop(struct svc_rqst *rqstp)
>  	trace_svc_drop(rqstp);
>  }
>  
> +static void svc_release_rqst(struct svc_rqst *rqstp)
> +{
> +	const struct svc_procedure *procp = rqstp->rq_procinfo;
> +
> +	if (procp && procp->pc_release)
> +		procp->pc_release(rqstp);
> +}
> +
>  /**
>   * svc_process - Execute one RPC transaction
>   * @rqstp: RPC transaction context
> @@ -1533,7 +1539,7 @@ static void svc_drop(struct svc_rqst *rqstp)
>   */
>  void svc_process(struct svc_rqst *rqstp)
>  {
> -	struct kvec		*resv = &rqstp->rq_res.head[0];
> +	struct kvec			*resv = &rqstp->rq_res.head[0];

Commas and Tabs - you can never really have enough of them, can you?

>  	__be32 *p;
>  
>  #if IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_FAIL_SUNRPC)
> @@ -1565,9 +1571,12 @@ void svc_process(struct svc_rqst *rqstp)
>  	if (unlikely(*p != rpc_call))
>  		goto out_baddir;
>  
> -	if (!svc_process_common(rqstp))
> +	if (!svc_process_common(rqstp)) {
> +		svc_release_rqst(rqstp);
>  		goto out_drop;
> +	}
>  	svc_send(rqstp);
> +	svc_release_rqst(rqstp);
>  	return;

Should we, as a general rule, avoid calling any cleanup function more
than once?  When tempted, we DEFINE_FREE() a cleanup function and
declare the variable appropriately.

Though in this case it might be easier to:

  if (svc_process_common(rqstp))
       svc_send(rqstp);
  else
       svc_drop(rqstp);
  svc_rlease_rqst(rqstp);
  return;

svc_process_bc() is a little more awkward.

But in general, delaying the release function until after the send seems
sound, and this patches appears to do it corretly.

Reviewed-by: NeilBrown <neil@brown.name>

NeilBrown
Re: [PATCH RFC 1/2] sunrpc: delay pc_release callback until after sending a reply
Posted by Jeff Layton 3 months ago
On Fri, 2025-07-04 at 09:33 +1000, NeilBrown wrote:
> On Fri, 04 Jul 2025, Jeff Layton wrote:
> > The server-side sunrpc code currently calls pc_release before sending
> > the reply. A later nfsd patch will change some pc_release callbacks to
> > do extra work to clean the pagecache. There is no need to delay sending
> > the reply for this, however.
> > 
> > Change svc_process and svc_process_bc to call pc_release after sending
> > the reply instead of before.
> > 
> > Signed-off-by: Jeff Layton <jlayton@kernel.org>
> > ---
> >  net/sunrpc/svc.c | 19 +++++++++++++++----
> >  1 file changed, 15 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
> > 
> > diff --git a/net/sunrpc/svc.c b/net/sunrpc/svc.c
> > index b1fab3a6954437cf751e4725fa52cfc83eddf2ab..103bb6ba8e140fdccd6cab124e715caeb41bb445 100644
> > --- a/net/sunrpc/svc.c
> > +++ b/net/sunrpc/svc.c
> > @@ -1426,8 +1426,6 @@ svc_process_common(struct svc_rqst *rqstp)
> >  
> >  	/* Call the function that processes the request. */
> >  	rc = process.dispatch(rqstp);
> > -	if (procp->pc_release)
> > -		procp->pc_release(rqstp);
> >  	xdr_finish_decode(xdr);
> >  
> >  	if (!rc)
> > @@ -1526,6 +1524,14 @@ static void svc_drop(struct svc_rqst *rqstp)
> >  	trace_svc_drop(rqstp);
> >  }
> >  
> > +static void svc_release_rqst(struct svc_rqst *rqstp)
> > +{
> > +	const struct svc_procedure *procp = rqstp->rq_procinfo;
> > +
> > +	if (procp && procp->pc_release)
> > +		procp->pc_release(rqstp);
> > +}
> > +
> >  /**
> >   * svc_process - Execute one RPC transaction
> >   * @rqstp: RPC transaction context
> > @@ -1533,7 +1539,7 @@ static void svc_drop(struct svc_rqst *rqstp)
> >   */
> >  void svc_process(struct svc_rqst *rqstp)
> >  {
> > -	struct kvec		*resv = &rqstp->rq_res.head[0];
> > +	struct kvec			*resv = &rqstp->rq_res.head[0];
> 
> Commas and Tabs - you can never really have enough of them, can you?
> 

Not sure what happened there. I'll drop that hunk.

> >  	__be32 *p;
> >  
> >  #if IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_FAIL_SUNRPC)
> > @@ -1565,9 +1571,12 @@ void svc_process(struct svc_rqst *rqstp)
> >  	if (unlikely(*p != rpc_call))
> >  		goto out_baddir;
> >  
> > -	if (!svc_process_common(rqstp))
> > +	if (!svc_process_common(rqstp)) {
> > +		svc_release_rqst(rqstp);
> >  		goto out_drop;
> > +	}
> >  	svc_send(rqstp);
> > +	svc_release_rqst(rqstp);
> >  	return;
> 
> Should we, as a general rule, avoid calling any cleanup function more
> than once?  When tempted, we DEFINE_FREE() a cleanup function and
> declare the variable appropriately.

I'm not opposed to that. I think that change probably deserves a
separate patch.

> Though in this case it might be easier to:
> 
>   if (svc_process_common(rqstp))
>        svc_send(rqstp);
>   else
>        svc_drop(rqstp);
>   svc_rlease_rqst(rqstp);
>   return;
> 

There is another place that does a "goto out_drop in that function. I'm
not sure changing that would improve things, but I'll see how it looks.

> svc_process_bc() is a little more awkward.
> 

Definitely.

> But in general, delaying the release function until after the send seems
> sound, and this patches appears to do it corretly.
> 
> Reviewed-by: NeilBrown <neil@brown.name>
> 
> NeilBrown

Thanks for the review!
-- 
Jeff Layton <jlayton@kernel.org>