From: ThangNN99 <ngocthang2710.1999@gmail.com>
To: Vlastimil Babka <vbabka@kernel.org>, Harry Yoo <harry@kernel.org>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
Sebastian Andrzej Siewior <bigeasy@linutronix.de>,
Clark Williams <clrkwllms@kernel.org>,
Steven Rostedt <rostedt@goodmis.org>
Cc: Hao Li <hao.li@linux.dev>, Christoph Lameter <cl@gentwo.org>,
David Rientjes <rientjes@google.com>,
Roman Gushchin <roman.gushchin@linux.dev>,
linux-mm@kvack.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
linux-rt-devel@lists.linux.dev,
ThangNN99 <ngocthang2710.1999@gmail.com>,
syzbot+acf142088e0182172e58@syzkaller.appspotmail.com
Subject: [PATCH] mm/slab: don't use kfree_rcu sheaves on PREEMPT_RT in kvfree_call_rcu()
Date: Mon, 31 Aug 2026 12:38:46 +0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20260831053846.107974-1-ngocthang2710.1999@gmail.com> (raw)
syzbot reports a possible circular locking dependency between
&p->pi_lock and the per-CPU kfree_rcu sheaf lock (_T->lock) on
PREEMPT_RT:
__balance_push_cpu_stop() [holds p->pi_lock, raw]
select_fallback_rq()
cpuset_cpus_allowed_fallback()
set_cpus_allowed_force()
kfree_rcu(ac.user_mask)
kvfree_call_rcu()
kfree_rcu_sheaf()
__kfree_rcu_sheaf()
local_trylock(&s->cpu_sheaves->lock) <- _T->lock
set_cpus_allowed_force() uses kfree_rcu() instead of kfree() here
specifically because it can be called with p->pi_lock (a raw
spinlock) held, and plain kfree() may sleep under PREEMPT_RT.
Commit 2a8bb29ec9b2 ("mm/slab: allow kfree_rcu_sheaf() on
PREEMPT_RT") made kvfree_call_rcu() try the sheaves fast path on
PREEMPT_RT too, since __kfree_rcu_sheaf() only trylocks there and
so cannot itself block. True, but the sheaf/barn locks it trylocks
are also taken as regular, blocking locks elsewhere, so lockdep
still records a lock-class ordering cycle against any raw spinlock
already held by the caller, which is what syzbot caught.
The plain kfree_rcu()/kvfree_rcu() API gives kvfree_call_rcu() no
way to know the caller is in such a context, so keep it
conservative on PREEMPT_RT and skip the sheaves layer there,
falling back to the existing raw_spinlock_t-protected krcp list,
which is always safe to nest under another raw spinlock. This
restores the pre-2a8bb29ec9b2 behavior of kvfree_call_rcu().
kfree_call_rcu_nolock(), added later in commit 3bc999d944b3
("mm/slab: introduce kfree_rcu_nolock()") for unknown/atomic
contexts, is unaffected: it already falls back to a lock-free
defer_kfree_rcu() when the sheaves trylock doesn't pan out, so it
keeps using SLAB_FREE_NOLOCK on PREEMPT_RT. Callers like
set_cpus_allowed_force() that want the sheaves fast path under a
raw spinlock should migrate to that API instead.
Reported-by: syzbot+acf142088e0182172e58@syzkaller.appspotmail.com
Closes: https://syzkaller.appspot.com/bug?extid=acf142088e0182172e58
Fixes: 2a8bb29ec9b2 ("mm/slab: allow kfree_rcu_sheaf() on PREEMPT_RT")
Signed-off-by: ThangNN99 <ngocthang2710.1999@gmail.com>
---
mm/slab_common.c | 9 ++++++++-
mm/slub.c | 7 ++++---
2 files changed, 12 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
diff --git a/mm/slab_common.c b/mm/slab_common.c
index b19ba1b31484..6d6cd78d00c4 100644
--- a/mm/slab_common.c
+++ b/mm/slab_common.c
@@ -2034,7 +2034,14 @@ void kvfree_call_rcu(struct kvfree_rcu_head *head, void *ptr)
if (!head)
might_sleep();
- if (kfree_rcu_sheaf(ptr))
+ /*
+ * Callers may hold a raw spinlock here on PREEMPT_RT (e.g.
+ * set_cpus_allowed_force() with p->pi_lock held), and the sheaf/barn
+ * locks are also taken as blocking locks elsewhere, so trying them
+ * here creates a lockdep-visible ordering conflict. Skip sheaves on
+ * PREEMPT_RT; use kfree_rcu_nolock() instead if this doesn't apply.
+ */
+ if (!IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_PREEMPT_RT) && 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 f9b56cb439e7..83bc322557f8 100644
--- a/mm/slub.c
+++ b/mm/slub.c
@@ -6088,10 +6088,11 @@ static void rcu_free_sheaf(struct rcu_head *head)
/*
* kvfree_call_rcu() can be called while holding a raw_spinlock_t. Since
* __kfree_rcu_sheaf() may acquire a spinlock_t (sleeping lock on PREEMPT_RT),
- * this would violate lock nesting rules. Therefore, kvfree_call_rcu() avoids
- * this problem by passing SLAB_FREE_NOLOCK on PREEMPT_RT.
+ * this would violate lock nesting rules. kvfree_call_rcu() avoids this by
+ * bypassing the sheaves layer on PREEMPT_RT; use kfree_call_rcu_nolock()
+ * instead for atomic/unknown-context callers that need the sheaves path.
*
- * However, lockdep still complains that it is invalid to acquire spinlock_t
+ * lockdep still complains that it is invalid to acquire spinlock_t
* while holding raw_spinlock_t, even on !PREEMPT_RT where spinlock_t is a
* spinning lock. Tell lockdep that acquiring spinlock_t is valid here
* by temporarily raising the wait-type to LD_WAIT_CONFIG. Skip the lockdep map
--
2.43.0
next reply other threads:[~2026-08-31 5:39 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 8+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2026-08-31 5:38 ThangNN99 [this message]
2026-08-31 6:06 ` [PATCH v2] mm/slab: don't use kfree_rcu sheaves on PREEMPT_RT in kvfree_call_rcu() ThangNN99
2026-08-31 13:00 ` Sebastian Andrzej Siewior
2026-08-31 13:32 ` [PATCH v3] " ThangNN99
2026-08-31 14:35 ` Sebastian Andrzej Siewior
2026-08-31 16:04 ` Vlastimil Babka (SUSE)
2026-08-31 16:17 ` [PATCH] mm/slab: don't use kfree_rcu_sheaf() on PREEMPT_RT again ThangNN99
2026-09-02 10:05 ` [PATCH v3] mm/slab: don't use kfree_rcu sheaves on PREEMPT_RT in kvfree_call_rcu() Harry Yoo
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=20260831053846.107974-1-ngocthang2710.1999@gmail.com \
--to=ngocthang2710.1999@gmail.com \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=bigeasy@linutronix.de \
--cc=cl@gentwo.org \
--cc=clrkwllms@kernel.org \
--cc=hao.li@linux.dev \
--cc=harry@kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
--cc=linux-rt-devel@lists.linux.dev \
--cc=rientjes@google.com \
--cc=roman.gushchin@linux.dev \
--cc=rostedt@goodmis.org \
--cc=syzbot+acf142088e0182172e58@syzkaller.appspotmail.com \
--cc=vbabka@kernel.org \
/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