Re: [PATCH v2 1/4] sched/task: Add the put_task_struct_atomic_safe function

[Oleg Nesterov]

On 01/23, Oleg Nesterov wrote:
>
> On 01/20, Wander Lairson Costa wrote:
> >
> > +static inline void put_task_struct_atomic_safe(struct task_struct *task)
> > +{
> > +	if (IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_PREEMPT_RT)) {
> > +		/*
> > +		 * Decrement the refcount explicitly to avoid unnecessarily
> > +		 * calling call_rcu.
> > +		 */
> > +		if (refcount_dec_and_test(&task->usage))
> > +			/*
> > +			 * under PREEMPT_RT, we can't call put_task_struct
> > +			 * in atomic context because it will indirectly
> > +			 * acquire sleeping locks.
> > +			 */
> > +			call_rcu(&task->rcu, __delayed_put_task_struct);
>                                   ^^^^^^^^^
> I am not sure the usage of task->rcu is safe...
>
> Suppose that, before __delayed_put_task_struct() is called by RCU, this task
> does the last schedule and calls put_task_struct_rcu_user().

Ah, sorry, please forget, rcu_users != 0 implies task->usage != 0.


> And, can't we simply turn put_task_struct() into something like
> 
> 	put_task_struct(struct task_struct *t)
> 	{
> 		if (refcount_dec_and_test(&t->usage)) {
> 			if (IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_PREEMPT_RT)
> 			    && (in_atomic() || irqs_disabled()))
> 				call_rcu(...);
> 			else
> 				__put_task_struct(t);
> 		}
> 	}
> 
> ?
> 
> Oleg.