Re: [PATCH v3] sched: do not call __put_task_struct() on rt if pi_blocked_on is set

From: Peter Zijlstra
Date: Thu Apr 10 2025 - 08:42:50 EST


On Thu, Apr 10, 2025 at 09:10:12AM -0300, Luis Claudio R. Goncalves wrote:
> 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);
>
> Fix that by unconditionally resorting to the deferred call to
> __put_task_struct().
>
> 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 and PeterZ) always call the RCU deferred __put_task_struct().

Changelog goes below the --- line.

> Suggested-by: Crystal Wood <crwood@xxxxxxxxxx>
> Signed-off-by: Luis Claudio R. Goncalves <lgoncalv@xxxxxxxxxx>
> ---
> include/linux/sched/task.h | 20 +++++---------------
> 1 file changed, 5 insertions(+), 15 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/include/linux/sched/task.h b/include/linux/sched/task.h
> index 0f2aeb37bbb04..49847efe5559e 100644
> --- a/include/linux/sched/task.h
> +++ b/include/linux/sched/task.h
> @@ -134,22 +134,12 @@ static inline void put_task_struct(struct task_struct *t)
> return;
>
> /*
> - * 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()) {
> - 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;
> - }

I don't think you've substantiated why the !PREEMPT_RT case needs to go.

> -
> - /*
> - * under PREEMPT_RT, we can't call put_task_struct
> + * In !RT, it is always safe to call __put_task_struct(),
> + * but 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
>