From: Oleg Nesterov <oleg@redhat.com>
To: "Luis Claudio R. Goncalves" <lgoncalv@redhat.com>
Cc: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>,
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>,
Ben Segall <bsegall@google.com>,
Dietmar Eggemann <dietmar.eggemann@arm.com>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>, Mel Gorman <mgorman@suse.de>,
Valentin Schneider <vschneid@redhat.com>,
Vincent Guittot <vincent.guittot@linaro.org>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
Wander Lairson Costa <wander@redhat.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v6] sched: do not call __put_task_struct() on rt if pi_blocked_on is set
Date: Tue, 29 Jul 2025 13:47:03 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20250729114702.GA18541@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <aIh5QajyaVT7MtVp@uudg.org>
On 07/29, Luis Claudio R. Goncalves wrote:
>
> From: Luis Claudio R. Goncalves <lgoncalv@redhat.com>
> Subject: sched: restore the behavior of put_task_struct() for non-rt
>
> Commit 8671bad873eb ("sched: Do not call __put_task_struct() on rt
> if pi_blocked_on is set") changed the behavior of put_task_struct()
> unconditionally, even when PREEMPT_RT was not enabled, in clear mismatch
> with the commit description.
>
> Restore the previous behavior of put_task_struct() for the PREEMPT_RT
> disabled case.
>
> Fixes: 8671bad873eb ("sched: Do not call __put_task_struct() on rt if pi_blocked_on is set")
> Signed-off-by: Luis Claudio R. Goncalves <lgoncalv@redhat.com>
> ---
> diff --git a/include/linux/sched/task.h b/include/linux/sched/task.h
> index ea41795a352b..51678a541477 100644
> --- a/include/linux/sched/task.h
> +++ b/include/linux/sched/task.h
> @@ -130,6 +133,16 @@ static inline void put_task_struct(struct task_struct *t)
> if (!refcount_dec_and_test(&t->usage))
> return;
>
> + /* In !RT, it is always safe to call __put_task_struct(). */
> + if (!IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_PREEMPT_RT)) {
> + static DEFINE_WAIT_OVERRIDE_MAP(put_task_map, LD_WAIT_SLEEP);
> +
> + lock_map_acquire_try(&put_task_map);
> + __put_task_struct(t);
> + lock_map_release(&put_task_map);
> + return;
> + }
FWIW:
Acked-by: Oleg Nesterov <oleg@redhat.com>
At the same time... I don't understand this DEFINE_WAIT_OVERRIDE_MAP().
IIUC, we need to shut up lockdep when put_task_struct() is called under
raw_spinlock_t and __put_task_struct() paths take spinlock_t, right?
Perhaps this deserves a comment...
But if I am right, why LD_WAIT_SLEEP? LD_WAIT_CONFIG should equally work, no?
LD_WAIT_SLEEP can fool lockdep more than we need, suppose that __put_task_struct()
does mutex_lock(). Not really a problem, might_sleep/etc will complain in this
case, but still.
Or I am totally confused?
Oleg.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2025-07-29 11:48 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 16+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2025-07-07 14:03 [PATCH v6] sched: do not call __put_task_struct() on rt if pi_blocked_on is set Luis Claudio R. Goncalves
2025-07-10 16:19 ` Valentin Schneider
2025-07-14 14:15 ` Sebastian Andrzej Siewior
2025-07-16 10:19 ` [tip: sched/core] sched: Do " tip-bot2 for Luis Claudio R. Goncalves
2025-07-28 20:14 ` [PATCH v6] sched: do " Oleg Nesterov
2025-07-29 7:33 ` Luis Claudio R. Goncalves
2025-07-29 11:47 ` Oleg Nesterov [this message]
2025-07-29 12:45 ` Luis Claudio R. Goncalves
2025-07-29 13:09 ` Oleg Nesterov
2025-08-01 10:24 ` Oleg Nesterov
2025-08-01 10:51 ` Luis Claudio R. Goncalves
2025-08-11 10:59 ` Sebastian Andrzej Siewior
2025-08-11 11:06 ` Oleg Nesterov
2025-08-11 12:16 ` Sebastian Andrzej Siewior
2025-08-11 12:19 ` Oleg Nesterov
2025-08-11 12:27 ` Sebastian Andrzej Siewior
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=20250729114702.GA18541@redhat.com \
--to=oleg@redhat.com \
--cc=bigeasy@linutronix.de \
--cc=brho@google.com \
--cc=bsegall@google.com \
--cc=clrkwllms@kernel.org \
--cc=crwood@redhat.com \
--cc=dietmar.eggemann@arm.com \
--cc=dvernet@meta.com \
--cc=joshdon@google.com \
--cc=juri.lelli@redhat.com \
--cc=lgoncalv@redhat.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-rt-devel@lists.linux.dev \
--cc=mgorman@suse.de \
--cc=mingo@redhat.com \
--cc=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=rostedt@goodmis.org \
--cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
--cc=tj@kernel.org \
--cc=vincent.guittot@linaro.org \
--cc=vschneid@redhat.com \
--cc=wander@redhat.com \
/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).