From: "Luis Claudio R. Goncalves" <lgoncalv@redhat.com>
To: Sebastian Andrzej Siewior <bigeasy@linutronix.de>,
Clark Williams <clrkwllms@kernel.org>,
Steven Rostedt <rostedt@goodmis.org>, Tejun Heo <tj@kernel.org>,
David Vernet <dvernet@meta.com>, Barret Rhoden <brho@google.com>,
Josh Don <joshdon@google.com>, Crystal Wood <crwood@redhat.com>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-rt-devel@lists.linux.dev,
Juri Lelli <juri.lelli@redhat.com>,
lclaudio00@gmail.com
Subject: [PATCH v2] sched: do not call __put_task_struct() on rt if pi_blocked_on is set
Date: Wed, 9 Apr 2025 15:58:32 -0300 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <Z_bDWN2pAnijPAMR@uudg.org> (raw)
With PREEMPT_RT enabled, some of the calls to put_task_struct() coming
from rt_mutex_adjust_prio_chain() could happen in preemptible context and
with a mutex enqueued. That could lead to this sequence:
rt_mutex_adjust_prio_chain()
put_task_struct()
__put_task_struct()
sched_ext_free()
spin_lock_irqsave()
rtlock_lock() ---> TRIGGERS
lockdep_assert(!current->pi_blocked_on);
Adjust the check in put_task_struct() to also consider pi_blocked_on before
calling __put_task_struct(), resorting to the deferred call in case it is
set.
v2: Rostedt suggested removing the #ifdef from put_task_struct() and
creating tsk_is_pi_blocked_on() in sched.h to make the change cleaner.
Suggested-by: Crystal Wood <crwood@redhat.com>
Signed-off-by: Luis Claudio R. Goncalves <lgoncalv@redhat.com>
---
include/linux/sched.h | 12 ++++++++++++
include/linux/sched/task.h | 10 +++++++---
2 files changed, 19 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
diff --git a/include/linux/sched.h b/include/linux/sched.h
index 5ec93e5ba53a9..9fbfa7f55a83d 100644
--- a/include/linux/sched.h
+++ b/include/linux/sched.h
@@ -2148,6 +2148,18 @@ static inline bool task_is_runnable(struct task_struct *p)
return p->on_rq && !p->se.sched_delayed;
}
+#ifdef CONFIG_RT_MUTEXES
+static inline bool tsk_is_pi_blocked_on(struct task_struct *tsk)
+{
+ return tsk->pi_blocked_on != NULL;
+}
+#else
+static inline bool tsk_is_pi_blocked_on(strut task_struct *tsk)
+{
+ return false;
+}
+#endif
+
extern bool sched_task_on_rq(struct task_struct *p);
extern unsigned long get_wchan(struct task_struct *p);
extern struct task_struct *cpu_curr_snapshot(int cpu);
diff --git a/include/linux/sched/task.h b/include/linux/sched/task.h
index 0f2aeb37bbb04..1f17a3dd51774 100644
--- a/include/linux/sched/task.h
+++ b/include/linux/sched/task.h
@@ -135,9 +135,11 @@ static inline void put_task_struct(struct task_struct *t)
/*
* In !RT, it is always safe to call __put_task_struct().
- * Under RT, we can only call it in preemptible context.
+ * Under RT, we can only call it in preemptible context,
+ * when not blocked on a PI chain.
*/
- if (!IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_PREEMPT_RT) || preemptible()) {
+ if (!IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_PREEMPT_RT) ||
+ (preemptible() || !tsk_is_pi_blocked_on(current))) {
static DEFINE_WAIT_OVERRIDE_MAP(put_task_map, LD_WAIT_SLEEP);
lock_map_acquire_try(&put_task_map);
@@ -149,7 +151,9 @@ static inline void put_task_struct(struct task_struct *t)
/*
* under PREEMPT_RT, we can't call put_task_struct
* in atomic context because it will indirectly
- * acquire sleeping locks.
+ * acquire sleeping locks. The same is true if the
+ * current process has a mutex enqueued (blocked on
+ * a PI chain).
*
* call_rcu() will schedule delayed_put_task_struct_rcu()
* to be called in process context.
--
2.49.0
next reply other threads:[~2025-04-09 18:58 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 5+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2025-04-09 18:58 Luis Claudio R. Goncalves [this message]
2025-04-10 6:48 ` [PATCH v2] sched: do not call __put_task_struct() on rt if pi_blocked_on is set Sebastian Andrzej Siewior
2025-04-10 7:51 ` Peter Zijlstra
2025-04-10 15:32 ` Sebastian Andrzej Siewior
2025-05-12 19:01 ` Luis Claudio R. Goncalves
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=Z_bDWN2pAnijPAMR@uudg.org \
--to=lgoncalv@redhat.com \
--cc=bigeasy@linutronix.de \
--cc=brho@google.com \
--cc=clrkwllms@kernel.org \
--cc=crwood@redhat.com \
--cc=dvernet@meta.com \
--cc=joshdon@google.com \
--cc=juri.lelli@redhat.com \
--cc=lclaudio00@gmail.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-rt-devel@lists.linux.dev \
--cc=rostedt@goodmis.org \
--cc=tj@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).