[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <9ff7ea3a-b48b-4cff-851e-179713393531@paulmck-laptop>
Date: Mon, 24 Apr 2023 11:09:19 -0700
From: "Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@...nel.org>
To: Wander Lairson Costa <wander@...hat.com>
Cc: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>,
Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <acme@...nel.org>,
Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@....com>,
Alexander Shishkin <alexander.shishkin@...ux.intel.com>,
Jiri Olsa <jolsa@...nel.org>,
Namhyung Kim <namhyung@...nel.org>,
Ian Rogers <irogers@...gle.com>,
Adrian Hunter <adrian.hunter@...el.com>,
Will Deacon <will@...nel.org>,
Waiman Long <longman@...hat.com>,
Boqun Feng <boqun.feng@...il.com>,
Juri Lelli <juri.lelli@...hat.com>,
Vincent Guittot <vincent.guittot@...aro.org>,
Dietmar Eggemann <dietmar.eggemann@....com>,
Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>,
Ben Segall <bsegall@...gle.com>, Mel Gorman <mgorman@...e.de>,
Daniel Bristot de Oliveira <bristot@...hat.com>,
Valentin Schneider <vschneid@...hat.com>,
"Eric W. Biederman" <ebiederm@...ssion.com>,
Michael Ellerman <mpe@...erman.id.au>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
Oleg Nesterov <oleg@...hat.com>,
Kefeng Wang <wangkefeng.wang@...wei.com>,
"Liam R. Howlett" <Liam.Howlett@...cle.com>,
Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org>,
Christian Brauner <brauner@...nel.org>,
Andrei Vagin <avagin@...il.com>,
Shakeel Butt <shakeelb@...gle.com>,
open list <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
"open list:PERFORMANCE EVENTS SUBSYSTEM"
<linux-perf-users@...r.kernel.org>, Hu Chunyu <chuhu@...hat.com>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v6 2/3] sched/task: Add the put_task_struct_atomic_safe()
function
On Fri, Apr 14, 2023 at 09:55:28AM -0300, Wander Lairson Costa wrote:
> Due to the possibility of indirectly acquiring sleeping locks, it is
> unsafe to call put_task_struct() in atomic contexts when the kernel is
> compiled with PREEMPT_RT.
>
> To mitigate this issue, this commit introduces
> put_task_struct_atomic_safe(), which schedules __put_task_struct()
> through call_rcu() when PREEMPT_RT is enabled. While a workqueue would
> be a more natural approach, we cannot allocate dynamic memory from
> atomic context in PREEMPT_RT, making the code more complex.
>
> This implementation ensures safe execution in atomic contexts and
> avoids any potential issues that may arise from using the non-atomic
> version.
>
> Signed-off-by: Wander Lairson Costa <wander@...hat.com>
> Reported-by: Hu Chunyu <chuhu@...hat.com>
> Cc: Paul McKenney <paulmck@...nel.org>
> Cc: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>
> ---
> include/linux/sched/task.h | 31 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> kernel/fork.c | 8 ++++++++
> 2 files changed, 39 insertions(+)
>
> diff --git a/include/linux/sched/task.h b/include/linux/sched/task.h
> index b597b97b1f8f..5c13b83d7008 100644
> --- a/include/linux/sched/task.h
> +++ b/include/linux/sched/task.h
> @@ -141,6 +141,37 @@ static inline void put_task_struct_many(struct task_struct *t, int nr)
>
> void put_task_struct_rcu_user(struct task_struct *task);
>
> +extern void __delayed_put_task_struct(struct rcu_head *rhp);
> +
> +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() will schedule delayed_put_task_struct_rcu()
> + * to be called in process context.
> + *
> + * __put_task_struct() is called called when
> + * refcount_dec_and_test(&t->usage) succeeds.
> + *
> + * This means that it can't "conflict" with
> + * put_task_struct_rcu_user() which abuses ->rcu the same
> + * way; rcu_users has a reference so task->usage can't be
> + * zero after rcu_users 1 -> 0 transition.
> + */
> + call_rcu(&task->rcu, __delayed_put_task_struct);
This will invoke __delayed_put_task_struct() with softirqs disabled.
Or do softirq-disabled contexts count as non-atomic in PREEMPT_RT?
Thanx, Paul
> + } else {
> + put_task_struct(task);
> + }
> +}
> +
> /* Free all architecture-specific resources held by a thread. */
> void release_thread(struct task_struct *dead_task);
>
> diff --git a/kernel/fork.c b/kernel/fork.c
> index 0c92f224c68c..9884794fe4b8 100644
> --- a/kernel/fork.c
> +++ b/kernel/fork.c
> @@ -854,6 +854,14 @@ void __put_task_struct(struct task_struct *tsk)
> }
> EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(__put_task_struct);
>
> +void __delayed_put_task_struct(struct rcu_head *rhp)
> +{
> + struct task_struct *task = container_of(rhp, struct task_struct, rcu);
> +
> + __put_task_struct(task);
> +}
> +EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(__delayed_put_task_struct);
> +
> void __init __weak arch_task_cache_init(void) { }
>
> /*
> --
> 2.39.2
>
Powered by blists - more mailing lists