linux-perf-users.vger.kernel.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Sebastian Andrzej Siewior <bigeasy@linutronix.de>
To: Wander Lairson Costa <wander@redhat.com>
Cc: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>,
	Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>,
	Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <acme@kernel.org>,
	Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@arm.com>,
	Alexander Shishkin <alexander.shishkin@linux.intel.com>,
	Jiri Olsa <jolsa@kernel.org>, Namhyung Kim <namhyung@kernel.org>,
	Ian Rogers <irogers@google.com>,
	Adrian Hunter <adrian.hunter@intel.com>,
	Will Deacon <will@kernel.org>, Waiman Long <longman@redhat.com>,
	Boqun Feng <boqun.feng@gmail.com>,
	Juri Lelli <juri.lelli@redhat.com>,
	Vincent Guittot <vincent.guittot@linaro.org>,
	Dietmar Eggemann <dietmar.eggemann@arm.com>,
	Steven Rostedt <rostedt@goodmis.org>,
	Ben Segall <bsegall@google.com>, Mel Gorman <mgorman@suse.de>,
	Daniel Bristot de Oliveira <bristot@redhat.com>,
	Valentin Schneider <vschneid@redhat.com>,
	"Eric W. Biederman" <ebiederm@xmission.com>,
	Kefeng Wang <wangkefeng.wang@huawei.com>,
	Michael Ellerman <mpe@ellerman.id.au>,
	Oleg Nesterov <oleg@redhat.com>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
	"Liam R. Howlett" <Liam.Howlett@oracle.com>,
	Christian Brauner <brauner@kernel.org>,
	Kees Cook <keescook@chromium.org>,
	Andrei Vagin <avagin@gmail.com>,
	Shakeel Butt <shakeelb@google.com>,
	open list <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
	"open list:PERFORMANCE EVENTS SUBSYSTEM" 
	<linux-perf-users@vger.kernel.org>,
	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v7 1/3] sched/core: warn on call put_task_struct in invalid context
Date: Fri, 28 Apr 2023 18:17:58 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20230428161758.xN5vwuUq@linutronix.de> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20230425114307.36889-2-wander@redhat.com>

On 2023-04-25 08:43:01 [-0300], Wander Lairson Costa wrote:
> Under PREEMPT_RT, spinlocks become sleepable locks. put_task_struct()
> indirectly acquires a spinlock. Therefore, it can't be called in
> atomic/interrupt context in RT kernels.
> 
> To prevent such conditions, add a check for atomic/interrupt context
> before calling put_task_struct().
> 
> Signed-off-by: Wander Lairson Costa <wander@redhat.com>
> Suggested-by: Sebastian Andrzej Siewior <bigeasy@linutronix.de>

Been only CCed here.

I asked to not special case PREEMPT_RT but doing this (clean up via RCU)
unconditionally. I don't remember that someone said "this is a bad
because $reason".

Lockdep will complain about this on !RT.

The below open codes rtlock_might_resched() with no explanation on why
it works or where it comes from.

The function is named put_task_struct_atomic_safe() yet it behaves it
differently on PREEMPT_RT otherwise it remains put_task_struct().

Not good.

> ---
>  include/linux/sched/task.h | 14 ++++++++++++++
>  1 file changed, 14 insertions(+)
> 
> diff --git a/include/linux/sched/task.h b/include/linux/sched/task.h
> index 357e0068497c..b597b97b1f8f 100644
> --- a/include/linux/sched/task.h
> +++ b/include/linux/sched/task.h
> @@ -113,14 +113,28 @@ static inline struct task_struct *get_task_struct(struct task_struct *t)
>  
>  extern void __put_task_struct(struct task_struct *t);
>  
> +#define PUT_TASK_RESCHED_OFFSETS \
> +	(rcu_preempt_depth() << MIGHT_RESCHED_RCU_SHIFT)
> +
> +#define __put_task_might_resched() \
> +	__might_resched(__FILE__, __LINE__, PUT_TASK_RESCHED_OFFSETS)
> +
> +#define put_task_might_resched()			\
> +	do {						\
> +		if (IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_PREEMPT_RT))	\
> +			__put_task_might_resched();	\
> +	} while (0)
> +
>  static inline void put_task_struct(struct task_struct *t)
>  {
> +	put_task_might_resched();
>  	if (refcount_dec_and_test(&t->usage))
>  		__put_task_struct(t);
>  }
>  
>  static inline void put_task_struct_many(struct task_struct *t, int nr)
>  {
> +	put_task_might_resched();
>  	if (refcount_sub_and_test(nr, &t->usage))
>  		__put_task_struct(t);
>  }
> -- 
> 2.40.0
> 

Sebastian

  reply	other threads:[~2023-04-28 16:18 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 29+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2023-04-25 11:43 [PATCH v7 0/3] Introduce put_task_struct_atomic_sleep() Wander Lairson Costa
2023-04-25 11:43 ` [PATCH v7 1/3] sched/core: warn on call put_task_struct in invalid context Wander Lairson Costa
2023-04-28 16:17   ` Sebastian Andrzej Siewior [this message]
2023-05-02 14:46     ` Wander Lairson Costa
2023-04-25 11:43 ` [PATCH v7 2/3] sched/task: Add the put_task_struct_atomic_safe() function Wander Lairson Costa
2023-05-04  8:42   ` Peter Zijlstra
2023-05-04  9:32     ` Valentin Schneider
2023-05-04 12:24       ` Wander Lairson Costa
2023-05-04 12:24     ` Wander Lairson Costa
2023-05-04 12:29     ` Oleg Nesterov
2023-05-04 14:33       ` Peter Zijlstra
2023-05-04 14:55         ` Wander Lairson Costa
2023-05-04 15:23           ` Oleg Nesterov
2023-05-04 15:30             ` Peter Zijlstra
2023-05-05 13:39               ` Peter Zijlstra
2023-05-04 18:29             ` Wander Lairson Costa
2023-05-04 19:22               ` Oleg Nesterov
2023-05-04 19:38                 ` Wander Lairson Costa
2023-05-04 20:16                   ` Oleg Nesterov
2023-05-08 12:30                     ` Wander Lairson Costa
2023-05-04 15:24           ` Peter Zijlstra
2023-05-04 18:21             ` Wander Lairson Costa
2023-05-05 13:32               ` Peter Zijlstra
2023-05-05 14:26                 ` Steven Rostedt
2023-05-05 14:29                   ` Steven Rostedt
2023-05-08 12:28                 ` Wander Lairson Costa
2023-04-25 11:43 ` [PATCH v7 3/3] treewide: replace put_task_struct() with the atomic safe version Wander Lairson Costa
2023-04-26 12:05 ` [PATCH v7 0/3] Introduce put_task_struct_atomic_sleep() Valentin Schneider
2023-04-26 17:44 ` Waiman Long

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=20230428161758.xN5vwuUq@linutronix.de \
    --to=bigeasy@linutronix.de \
    --cc=Liam.Howlett@oracle.com \
    --cc=acme@kernel.org \
    --cc=adrian.hunter@intel.com \
    --cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
    --cc=alexander.shishkin@linux.intel.com \
    --cc=avagin@gmail.com \
    --cc=boqun.feng@gmail.com \
    --cc=brauner@kernel.org \
    --cc=bristot@redhat.com \
    --cc=bsegall@google.com \
    --cc=dietmar.eggemann@arm.com \
    --cc=ebiederm@xmission.com \
    --cc=irogers@google.com \
    --cc=jolsa@kernel.org \
    --cc=juri.lelli@redhat.com \
    --cc=keescook@chromium.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-perf-users@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=longman@redhat.com \
    --cc=mark.rutland@arm.com \
    --cc=mgorman@suse.de \
    --cc=mingo@redhat.com \
    --cc=mpe@ellerman.id.au \
    --cc=namhyung@kernel.org \
    --cc=oleg@redhat.com \
    --cc=peterz@infradead.org \
    --cc=rostedt@goodmis.org \
    --cc=shakeelb@google.com \
    --cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
    --cc=vincent.guittot@linaro.org \
    --cc=vschneid@redhat.com \
    --cc=wander@redhat.com \
    --cc=wangkefeng.wang@huawei.com \
    --cc=will@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;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).