From nobody Fri Oct 10 13:31:32 2025 Received: from us-smtp-delivery-124.mimecast.com (us-smtp-delivery-124.mimecast.com [170.10.133.124]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 6D73F1E3775 for ; Fri, 13 Jun 2025 15:05:26 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=170.10.133.124 ARC-Seal: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1749827129; cv=none; b=cvNQ7I54P+UCU2Y5/1nZnan/utw2h2tqoRKbTcIAql/sbCBp1ECnFfaSRtx7h+F2OX58K8pL2nBERgnRVAdKtlOuc3qrNLAEbuXM5yN8bBdFFjoKeGRKoHpL4+wlsdMCjujtFt37vuwNcNMNbO1YCX7IRJoVPxol8iTCW4IcDbU= ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1749827129; c=relaxed/simple; bh=5htOi7Xq7BJFop/zGyQ8bAo3uW48aC6mu64egcsnLl8=; h=Date:From:To:Subject:Message-ID:MIME-Version:Content-Type: Content-Disposition; b=l/Yadiy05Bl3QH8zT/w3Y6GwDx2cXclYdL/OVM7SqxTTjgrCU+liYaEJPXVALCxHSt+amdD/ZZfUOaUvAFswsh7PXDGl1D6TKhsuE1lvzg8UZIwYCAdWUSic+yDDOwlOEqQwW0ITydFnSDZ6diZfhvAudWsk81Ln9KuS9dr3zgI= ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=quarantine dis=none) header.from=redhat.com; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=redhat.com; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=redhat.com header.i=@redhat.com header.b=XiKUzjJd; arc=none smtp.client-ip=170.10.133.124 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=quarantine dis=none) header.from=redhat.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=redhat.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=redhat.com header.i=@redhat.com header.b="XiKUzjJd" DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=redhat.com; s=mimecast20190719; t=1749827125; h=from:from:reply-to:subject:subject:date:date:message-id:message-id: to:to:cc:mime-version:mime-version:content-type:content-type; bh=eydungCzbjJFbEm6WAZhTNuaULfp1EVCeqjKqKlnSWY=; b=XiKUzjJdhJyRiHsaISh/latfGA2pfZzbjFleM9sld5tFFF0qw7y77I/kCWHVdblvUBTueB Hp/pdBWGd4xrYagreXV6GRZLe/HUdtEc9h6cvXWTzxWndBKwR32UoqyBl3MDaAqZU++Uyx xYHT8WwdLkp3R/LIO9nCggT7FwhQuW8= Received: from mx-prod-mc-06.mail-002.prod.us-west-2.aws.redhat.com (ec2-35-165-154-97.us-west-2.compute.amazonaws.com [35.165.154.97]) by relay.mimecast.com with ESMTP with STARTTLS (version=TLSv1.3, cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384) id us-mta-262-weIA_g6MMquHGSonfW0XDg-1; Fri, 13 Jun 2025 11:05:22 -0400 X-MC-Unique: weIA_g6MMquHGSonfW0XDg-1 X-Mimecast-MFC-AGG-ID: weIA_g6MMquHGSonfW0XDg_1749827119 Received: from mx-prod-int-02.mail-002.prod.us-west-2.aws.redhat.com (mx-prod-int-02.mail-002.prod.us-west-2.aws.redhat.com [10.30.177.15]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by mx-prod-mc-06.mail-002.prod.us-west-2.aws.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id A73AD1800295; Fri, 13 Jun 2025 15:05:18 +0000 (UTC) Received: from localhost (unknown [10.22.65.24]) by mx-prod-int-02.mail-002.prod.us-west-2.aws.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 918ED195E340; Fri, 13 Jun 2025 15:05:16 +0000 (UTC) Date: Fri, 13 Jun 2025 12:05:14 -0300 From: "Luis Claudio R. Goncalves" To: Peter Zijlstra , Sebastian Andrzej Siewior , Clark Williams , Steven Rostedt , Tejun Heo , David Vernet , Barret Rhoden , Josh Don , Crystal Wood , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-rt-devel@lists.linux.dev, Juri Lelli , Ben Segall , DietmarEggemann@uudg.org, dietmar.eggemann@arm.com, Ingo Molnar , Mel Gorman , Valentin Schneider , Vincent Guittot , Thomas Gleixner , Wander Lairson Costa Subject: [RESEND PATCH v4] sched: do not call __put_task_struct() on rt if pi_blocked_on is set Message-ID: Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Disposition: inline X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 3.0 on 10.30.177.15 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" 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_o= n); Fix that by unconditionally resorting to the deferred call to __put_task_struct() if PREEMPT_RT is enabled. Suggested-by: Crystal Wood Signed-off-by: Luis Claudio R. Goncalves Reviewed-by: Wander Laurson Costa --- Resent as a gentle reminder, because this issue results in scary backtraces, not obvious to debug and pinpoint root cause. v2: (Rostedt) remove the #ifdef from put_task_struct() and create tsk_is_pi_blocked_on() in sched.h to make the change cleaner. v3: (Sebastian, PeterZ) always call the deferred __put_task_struct() on RT. v4: Fix the implementation of what was requested on v3. include/linux/sched/task.h | 17 ++++++++--------- 1 file changed, 8 insertions(+), 9 deletions(-) diff --git a/include/linux/sched/task.h b/include/linux/sched/task.h index 0f2aeb37bbb04..51678a541477a 100644 --- a/include/linux/sched/task.h +++ b/include/linux/sched/task.h @@ -134,11 +134,8 @@ static inline void put_task_struct(struct task_struct = *t) if (!refcount_dec_and_test(&t->usage)) return; =20 - /* - * In !RT, it is always safe to call __put_task_struct(). - * Under RT, we can only call it in preemptible context. - */ - if (!IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_PREEMPT_RT) || preemptible()) { + /* 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); =20 lock_map_acquire_try(&put_task_map); @@ -148,11 +145,13 @@ static inline void put_task_struct(struct task_struct= *t) } =20 /* - * under PREEMPT_RT, we can't call put_task_struct + * 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() + * call_rcu() will schedule __put_task_struct_rcu_cb() * to be called in process context. * * __put_task_struct() is called when @@ -165,7 +164,7 @@ static inline void put_task_struct(struct task_struct *= t) * * delayed_free_task() also uses ->rcu, but it is only called * when it fails to fork a process. Therefore, there is no - * way it can conflict with put_task_struct(). + * way it can conflict with __put_task_struct(). */ call_rcu(&t->rcu, __put_task_struct_rcu_cb); } ----- End forwarded message -----