Re: [PATCH slab/for-next v4 5/8] mm/slab: allow kfree_rcu_sheaf() on PREEMPT_RT
"Vlastimil Babka (SUSE)" <[email protected]> Thu, 23 Jul 2026 11:46:08 +0200
| Newsgroups | dev.linux.lists.linux-rt-devel,dev.linux.lists.sashiko-reviews,org.kernel.vger.bpf,org.kernel.vger.linux-kernel |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <[email protected]> |
On 7/23/26 07:39, Harry Yoo wrote: > On 7/20/26 9:56 PM, [email protected] wrote: >> >>> diff --git a/mm/slub.c b/mm/slub.c >>> index 8afa6b47b1f2b..deac315d0f23e 100644 >>> --- a/mm/slub.c >>> +++ b/mm/slub.c >> [ ... ] >>> @@ -6080,10 +6081,10 @@ bool __kfree_rcu_sheaf(struct kmem_cache *s, void *obj, unsigned int free_flags) >>> struct slab_sheaf *rcu_sheaf; >>> bool allow_spin = free_flags_allow_spinning(free_flags); >>> >>> - if (WARN_ON_ONCE(IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_PREEMPT_RT))) >>> - return false; >>> + VM_WARN_ON_ONCE(IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_PREEMPT_RT) && allow_spin); >>> >>> - lock_map_acquire_try(&kfree_rcu_sheaf_map); >>> + if (!IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_PREEMPT_RT)) >>> + lock_map_acquire_try(&kfree_rcu_sheaf_map); >>> >>> if (!local_trylock(&s->cpu_sheaves->lock)) >> ^^^^^^^^^^^^^ >> [Severity: High] >> This is a pre-existing issue, but since we are enabling this path for >> PREEMPT_RT, does the use of GFP_NOWAIT later in this function cause >> lock recursion deadlocks? >> >> When the fast path fails, __kfree_rcu_sheaf() calls: >> >> empty = alloc_empty_sheaf(s, GFP_NOWAIT, alloc_flags); >> >> GFP_NOWAIT includes __GFP_KSWAPD_RECLAIM, which invokes wakeup_kswapd(). >> The wake-up path enters the scheduler via try_to_wake_up() and attempts to >> acquire scheduler locks like pi_lock and the runqueue lock. > > This indeed looks like a real issue as kfree_rcu() can be called under > scheduler locks, Are there any paths that actually do that? > but not sure how it's been undiscovered for this long? With kfree_rcu_sheaf_map we prevent the raw spinlock nesting detection in general. But I guess if there was an actual kfree_rcu() call under any scheduler lock involved in wakeup_kswapd(), lockdep would still trigger, right? >> If kvfree_call_rcu() was called while the CPU already holds these scheduler >> locks, will this wake-up attempt cause a lock recursion self-deadlock? >> >