From: sashiko-bot@kernel.org
Cc: linux-rt-devel@lists.linux.dev, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
bpf@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH for-next v3 6/9] mm/slab: allow kfree_rcu_sheaf() on PREEMPT_RT
Date: Mon, 15 Jun 2026 11:19:49 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20260615111949.F0FC51F000E9@smtp.kernel.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20260615-kfree_rcu_nolock-v3-6-70a54f3775bb@kernel.org>
Thank you for your contribution! Sashiko AI review found 1 potential issue(s) to consider:
- [High] Calling kfree_rcu_sheaf() on PREEMPT_RT from kvfree_call_rcu() causes an 'Invalid wait context' lockdep splat and potential deadlocks due to acquiring a sleeping lock from raw_spinlock, hardirq, or NMI contexts.
--
commit 67f0bb194ef2843a6fa5bfccfbb53884ff1a37b2
Author: Harry Yoo (Oracle) <harry@kernel.org>
mm/slab: allow kfree_rcu_sheaf() on PREEMPT_RT
This commit allows kfree_rcu_sheaf() to be used on kernels with
CONFIG_PREEMPT_RT by assuming that spinning is not allowed. It removes
the unconditional bailout and relaxes the limitation to try the sheaves
path.
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/linux-mm/6811cc17-8ee4-48c8-8cbf-6bf4d9f98162@kernel.org
> diff --git a/mm/slab_common.c b/mm/slab_common.c
> index 55546b8385ff3..807924a94fb08 100644
> --- a/mm/slab_common.c
> +++ b/mm/slab_common.c
[ ... ]
> @@ -1954,7 +1961,7 @@ void kvfree_call_rcu(struct rcu_head *head, void *ptr)
> if (!head)
> might_sleep();
>
> - if (!IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_PREEMPT_RT) && kfree_rcu_sheaf(ptr))
> + if (kfree_rcu_sheaf(ptr))
> return;
>
> // Queue the object but don't yet schedule the batch.
[ ... ]
> diff --git a/mm/slub.c b/mm/slub.c
> index ba593c1c53d50..4850629774b2a 100644
> --- a/mm/slub.c
> +++ b/mm/slub.c
[ ... ]
> @@ -6096,10 +6097,10 @@ bool __kfree_rcu_sheaf(struct kmem_cache *s, void *obj, bool allow_spin)
> struct slub_percpu_sheaves *pcs;
> struct slab_sheaf *rcu_sheaf;
>
> - if (WARN_ON_ONCE(IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_PREEMPT_RT)))
> - return false;
> + VM_WARN_ON_ONCE(IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_PREEMPT_RT) && allow_spin);
>
> - lock_map_acquire_try(&kfree_rcu_sheaf_map);
> + if (!IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_PREEMPT_RT))
> + lock_map_acquire_try(&kfree_rcu_sheaf_map);
>
> if (!local_trylock(&s->cpu_sheaves->lock))
[Severity: High]
Does acquiring this local lock with CONFIG_PREEMPT_RT enabled from
kvfree_call_rcu() trigger an invalid wait context lockdep splat?
Since kvfree_call_rcu() can be called from hardirq or nmi context, or
while holding a raw_spinlock_t (like pi_lock), the caller is in a raw
spin wait context. With CONFIG_PREEMPT_RT, local_lock maps to a
spinlock_t (rt_mutex), which is a sleeping lock.
Even though this uses a trylock and allow_spin is false, acquiring a
sleeping lock under a raw spinlock or in hardirq context violates
lockdep's wait context rules because lockdep evaluates the declared wait
types of the locks, not the runtime behavior.
Additionally, could the rt_mutex trylock implementation internally attempt
to acquire the task's pi_lock, leading to a potential deadlock?
> goto fail;
--
Sashiko AI review · https://sashiko.dev/#/patchset/20260615-kfree_rcu_nolock-v3-0-70a54f3775bb@kernel.org?part=6
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2026-06-15 11:19 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 23+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2026-06-15 11:05 [PATCH for-next v3 0/9] mm/slab: introduce kfree_rcu_nolock() and improve slub_kunit coverage Harry Yoo (Oracle)
2026-06-15 11:05 ` [PATCH for-next v3 1/9] slub_kunit: fall back to SW perf events when HW PMU is not available Harry Yoo (Oracle)
2026-06-15 11:14 ` sashiko-bot
2026-06-15 12:58 ` Harry Yoo
2026-06-15 20:01 ` Alexei Starovoitov
2026-06-15 11:05 ` [PATCH for-next v3 2/9] mm/slab, slub_kunit: register kprobe to trigger _nolock APIs Harry Yoo (Oracle)
2026-06-15 11:25 ` sashiko-bot
2026-06-15 20:04 ` Alexei Starovoitov
2026-06-15 11:05 ` [PATCH for-next v3 3/9] mm/slab: handle the !allow_spin case in kfree_rcu_sheaf() Harry Yoo (Oracle)
2026-06-15 11:24 ` sashiko-bot
2026-06-15 11:05 ` [PATCH for-next v3 4/9] mm/slab: use call_rcu() in unknown context if irqs are enabled Harry Yoo (Oracle)
2026-06-15 11:25 ` sashiko-bot
2026-06-15 11:05 ` [PATCH for-next v3 5/9] mm/slab: extend deferred free mechanism to handle rcu sheaves Harry Yoo (Oracle)
2026-06-15 11:24 ` sashiko-bot
2026-06-15 11:06 ` [PATCH for-next v3 6/9] mm/slab: allow kfree_rcu_sheaf() on PREEMPT_RT Harry Yoo (Oracle)
2026-06-15 11:19 ` sashiko-bot [this message]
2026-06-15 11:06 ` [PATCH for-next v3 7/9] mm/slab: introduce kfree_rcu_nolock() Harry Yoo (Oracle)
2026-06-15 11:22 ` sashiko-bot
2026-06-15 11:06 ` [PATCH for-next v3 8/9] mm/slab: introduce struct kfree_rcu_head and use in kfree_rcu_nolock() Harry Yoo (Oracle)
2026-06-15 11:22 ` sashiko-bot
2026-06-15 11:06 ` [PATCH for-next v3 9/9] slub_kunit: extend the test for kfree_rcu_nolock() Harry Yoo (Oracle)
2026-06-15 11:43 ` [PATCH for-next v3 0/9] mm/slab: introduce kfree_rcu_nolock() and improve slub_kunit coverage Harry Yoo
2026-06-15 20:28 ` Alexei Starovoitov
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20260615111949.F0FC51F000E9@smtp.kernel.org \
--to=sashiko-bot@kernel.org \
--cc=bpf@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-rt-devel@lists.linux.dev \
--cc=sashiko-reviews@lists.linux.dev \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox