Thread (4 messages) 4 messages, 2 authors, 2021-10-31

Re: epoll may leak events on dup

From: Eric Wong <hidden>
Date: 2021-10-31 07:51:55
Also in: lkml

Sargun Dhillon [off-list ref] wrote:
I discovered an interesting behaviour in epoll today. If I register the same 
file twice, under two different file descriptor numbers, and then I close one of 
the two file descriptors, epoll "leaks" the first event. This is fine, because 
one would think I could just go ahead and remove the event, but alas, that isn't 
the case. Some example python code follows to show the issue at hand.

I'm not sure if this is really considered a "bug" or just "interesting epoll
behaviour", but in my opinion this is kind of a bug, especially because leaks
may happen by accident -- especially if files are not immediately freed.
"Interesting epoll behavior" combined with a quirk with the
Python wrapper for epoll.  It passes the FD as epoll_event.data
(.data could also be any void *ptr, a u64, or u32).

Not knowing Python myself (but knowing Ruby and Perl5 well); I
assume Python developers chose the safest route in passing an
integer FD for .data.  Passing a pointer to an arbitrary
Perl/Ruby object would cause tricky lifetime issues with the
automatic memory management of those languages; I expect Python
would have the same problem.
I'm also not sure why epoll events are registered by file, and not just fd.
Is the expectation that you can share a single epoll amongst multiple
"users" and register different files that have the same file descriptor
No, the other way around.  Different FDs for the same file.

Having registration keyed by [file+fd] allows users to pass
different pointers for different events to the same file;
which could have its uses.

Registering by FD alone isn't enough; since the epoll FD itself
can be shared across fork (which is of limited usefulness[1]).
Originaly iterations of epoll were keyed only by the file;
with the FD being added later.
number (at least for purposes other than CRIU). Maybe someone can shed
light on the behaviour.
CRIU?  Checkpoint/Restore In Userspace?


[1] In contrast, kqueue has a unique close-on-fork behavior
    which greatly simplifies usage from C code (but less so
    for high-level runtimes which auto-close FDs).
Keyboard shortcuts
hback out one level
jnext message in thread
kprevious message in thread
ldrill in
Escclose help / fold thread tree
?toggle this help