-
Wander Lairson Costa authored
Under PREEMPT_RT, __put_task_struct() indirectly acquires sleeping locks. Therefore, it can't be called from an non-preemptible context. One practical example is splat inside inactive_task_timer(), which is called in a interrupt context: CPU: 1 PID: 2848 Comm: life Kdump: loaded Tainted: G W --------- Hardware name: HP ProLiant DL388p Gen8, BIOS P70 07/15/2012 Call Trace: dump_stack_lvl+0x57/0x7d mark_lock_irq.cold+0x33/0xba mark_lock+0x1e7/0x400 mark_usage+0x11d/0x140 __lock_acquire+0x30d/0x930 lock_acquire.part.0+0x9c/0x210 rt_spin_lock+0x27/0xe0 refill_obj_stock+0x3d/0x3a0 kmem_cache_free+0x357/0x560 inactive_task_timer+0x1ad/0x340 __run_hrtimer+0x8a/0x1a0 __hrtimer_run_queues+0x91/0x130 hrtimer_interrupt+0x10f/0x220 __sysvec_apic_timer_interrupt+0x7b/0xd0 sysvec_apic_timer_interrupt+0x4f/0xd0 asm_sysvec_apic_timer_interrupt+0x12/0x20 RIP: 0033:0x7fff196bf6f5 Instead of calling __put_task_struct() directly, we defer it using call_rcu(). A more natural approach would use a workqueue, but since in PREEMPT_RT, we can't allocate dynamic memory from atomic context, the code would become more complex because we would need to put the work_struct instance in the task_struct and initialize it when we allocate a new task_struct. The issue is reproducible with stress-ng: while true; do stress-ng --sched deadline --sched-period 1000000000 \ --sched-runtime 800000000 --sched-deadline \ 1000000000 --mmapfork 23 -t 20 done Reported-by: Hu Chunyu <chuhu@redhat.com> Suggested-by: Oleg Nesterov <oleg@redhat.com> Suggested-by: Valentin Schneider <vschneid@redhat.com> Suggested-by: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org> Signed-off-by: Wander Lairson Costa <wander@redhat.com> Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@infradead.org> Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20230614122323.37957-2-wander@redhat.com
d243b344