linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v2] sched: do not call __put_task_struct() on rt if pi_blocked

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <20250410064844.wm4KbunL@linutronix.de>
Date: Thu, 10 Apr 2025 08:48:44 +0200
From: Sebastian Andrzej Siewior <bigeasy@...utronix.de>
To: "Luis Claudio R. Goncalves" <lgoncalv@...hat.com>
Cc: Clark Williams <clrkwllms@...nel.org>,
	Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>, Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>,
	David Vernet <dvernet@...a.com>, Barret Rhoden <brho@...gle.com>,
	Josh Don <joshdon@...gle.com>, Crystal Wood <crwood@...hat.com>,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-rt-devel@...ts.linux.dev,
	Juri Lelli <juri.lelli@...hat.com>, lclaudio00@...il.com,
	Ben Segall <bsegall@...gle.com>,
	Dietmar Eggemann <dietmar.eggemann@....com>,
	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>, Mel Gorman <mgorman@...e.de>,
	Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
	Valentin Schneider <vschneid@...hat.com>,
	Vincent Guittot <vincent.guittot@...aro.org>,
	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] sched: do not call __put_task_struct() on rt if
 pi_blocked_on is set

+ sched folks.

On 2025-04-09 15:58:32 [-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);
> 
> Adjust the check in put_task_struct() to also consider pi_blocked_on before
> calling __put_task_struct(), resorting to the deferred call in case it is
> set.
> 
> v2: Rostedt suggested removing the #ifdef from put_task_struct() and
>     creating tsk_is_pi_blocked_on() in sched.h to make the change cleaner.

I complained about this special RT case in put_task_struct() when it was
first got introduced. Couldn't we just just unconditionally do the RCU
put?

> Suggested-by: Crystal Wood <crwood@...hat.com>
> Signed-off-by: Luis Claudio R. Goncalves <lgoncalv@...hat.com>
> ---
>  include/linux/sched.h      |   12 ++++++++++++
>  include/linux/sched/task.h |   10 +++++++---
>  2 files changed, 19 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/include/linux/sched.h b/include/linux/sched.h
> index 5ec93e5ba53a9..9fbfa7f55a83d 100644
> --- a/include/linux/sched.h
> +++ b/include/linux/sched.h
> @@ -2148,6 +2148,18 @@ static inline bool task_is_runnable(struct task_struct *p)
>  	return p->on_rq && !p->se.sched_delayed;
>  }
>  
> +#ifdef CONFIG_RT_MUTEXES
> +static inline bool tsk_is_pi_blocked_on(struct task_struct *tsk)
> +{
> +	return tsk->pi_blocked_on != NULL;
> +}
> +#else
> +static inline bool tsk_is_pi_blocked_on(strut task_struct *tsk)
> +{
> +	return false;
> +}
> +#endif
> +
>  extern bool sched_task_on_rq(struct task_struct *p);
>  extern unsigned long get_wchan(struct task_struct *p);
>  extern struct task_struct *cpu_curr_snapshot(int cpu);
> diff --git a/include/linux/sched/task.h b/include/linux/sched/task.h
> index 0f2aeb37bbb04..1f17a3dd51774 100644
> --- a/include/linux/sched/task.h
> +++ b/include/linux/sched/task.h
> @@ -135,9 +135,11 @@ static inline void put_task_struct(struct task_struct *t)
>  
>  	/*
>  	 * In !RT, it is always safe to call __put_task_struct().
> -	 * Under RT, we can only call it in preemptible context.
> +	 * Under RT, we can only call it in preemptible context,
> +	 * when not blocked on a PI chain.
>  	 */
> -	if (!IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_PREEMPT_RT) || preemptible()) {
> +	if (!IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_PREEMPT_RT) ||
> +	    (preemptible() || !tsk_is_pi_blocked_on(current))) {
>  		static DEFINE_WAIT_OVERRIDE_MAP(put_task_map, LD_WAIT_SLEEP);
>  
>  		lock_map_acquire_try(&put_task_map);
> @@ -149,7 +151,9 @@ static inline void put_task_struct(struct task_struct *t)
>  	/*
>  	 * 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.

Sebastian