From: Sebastian Andrzej Siewior <bigeasy@linutronix.de>
To: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Cc: "André Almeida" <andrealmeid@igalia.com>,
"Darren Hart" <dvhart@infradead.org>,
"Davidlohr Bueso" <dave@stgolabs.net>,
"Ingo Molnar" <mingo@redhat.com>,
"Peter Zijlstra" <peterz@infradead.org>,
"Thomas Gleixner" <tglx@linutronix.de>,
"Borislav Petkov" <bp@alien8.de>, "Yao Kai" <yaokai34@huawei.com>,
"Sebastian Andrzej Siewior" <bigeasy@linutronix.de>
Subject: [PATCH v4 1/2] futex: Provide rt_mutex_.*_schedule() equivalents for futex scheduling
Date: Tue, 1 Sep 2026 15:54:51 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20260901135453.3121948-2-bigeasy@linutronix.de> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20260901135453.3121948-1-bigeasy@linutronix.de>
There is rt_mutex_{pre|post}_schedule() around
rt_mutex_wait_proxy_lock() to ensure that sched_submit_work()/
sched_update_worker() is invoked before we schedule out and block on
rt_mutex while waiting for it become available.
The reason is that blocking on rt_mutex assigns a pi_waiter for the PI
chain and sched_submit_work() will also assign a pi_waiter if it blocks
on lock but a this point we already have a waiter assigned.
We can't skip sched_submit_work() entirely because I/O relies on the
fact that I/O queue is flushed while it blocks on a sleeping lock.
Therefore sched_submit_work() is moved before we block on the lock.
Sleeping lock in this context means mutex or rw_semaphore not spinlock_t
on PREEMPT_RT. Because the mutex abstraction on PREEMPT_RT uses the same
abstraction as the futex proxy lock, the futex code ended up using
rt_mutex_{pre|post}_schedule(), too.
Using it is/ was just to keep the task_struct::sched_rt_mutex assertion
happy. Futex proxy lock is used only in the syscall context of a task.
At this point it never got any I/O that needs to be flushed and it can't
be a workqueue that needs to notify that it will be scheduled out.
Therefore sched_submit_work() does nothing here.
By mistake futex_wait_requeue_pi() -> rt_mutex_wait_proxy_lock() did not
get the rt_mutex_{pre|post}_schedule() annotation. This was not noticed
because in this callchain the lock is (usually) not contended and so
rt_mutex_slowlock_block() does not schedule, triggering the assert.
Adding rt_mutex_pre_schedule() here looks wrong (as noted by PeterZ)
because at this point there is a pi_waiter recorded and invoking
sched_submit_work() with a possible lock contention would be wrong.
Add rt_mutex_futex_{pre|post}_schedule() which toggles the
sched_rt_mutex assert and does not involve sched_submit_work(). Add
asserts here to ensure that sched_submit_work() would do nothing. Use it
only in futex proxy lock case which is rt_mutex_wait_proxy_lock().
Remove it from futex_lock_pi().
Fixes: d14f9e930b90 ("locking/rtmutex: Use rt_mutex specific scheduler helpers")
Reported-by: Yao Kai <yaokai34@huawei.com>
Closes: https://lore.kernel.org/all/20260717084922.4153317-2-yaokai34@huawei.com
Signed-off-by: Sebastian Andrzej Siewior <bigeasy@linutronix.de>
---
include/linux/sched/rt.h | 2 ++
kernel/futex/pi.c | 16 +++-------------
kernel/locking/rtmutex_api.c | 2 ++
kernel/sched/core.c | 16 ++++++++++++++++
4 files changed, 23 insertions(+), 13 deletions(-)
diff --git a/include/linux/sched/rt.h b/include/linux/sched/rt.h
index 4e3338103654c..922935cc33833 100644
--- a/include/linux/sched/rt.h
+++ b/include/linux/sched/rt.h
@@ -52,8 +52,10 @@ static inline bool rt_or_dl_task_policy(struct task_struct *tsk)
#ifdef CONFIG_RT_MUTEXES
extern void rt_mutex_pre_schedule(void);
+extern void rt_mutex_futex_pre_schedule(void);
extern void rt_mutex_schedule(void);
extern void rt_mutex_post_schedule(void);
+extern void rt_mutex_futex_post_schedule(void);
/*
* Must hold either p->pi_lock or task_rq(p)->lock.
diff --git a/kernel/futex/pi.c b/kernel/futex/pi.c
index 88788e584ec8a..98f1b962e59a0 100644
--- a/kernel/futex/pi.c
+++ b/kernel/futex/pi.c
@@ -1070,17 +1070,11 @@ int futex_lock_pi(u32 __user *uaddr, unsigned int flags, ktime_t *time, int tryl
* Caution; releasing @hb in-scope. The hb->lock is still locked
* while the reference is dropped. The reference can not be dropped
* after the unlock because if a user initiated resize is in progress
- * then we might need to wake him. This can not be done after the
- * rt_mutex_pre_schedule() invocation. The hb will remain valid because
- * the thread, performing resize, will block on hb->lock during
- * the requeue.
+ * then we might need to wake him. The hb will remain valid
+ * because the thread, performing resize, will block on
+ * hb->lock during the requeue.
*/
futex_private_hash_put(no_free_ptr(hbr.fph));
- /*
- * Must be done before we enqueue the waiter, here is unfortunately
- * under the hb lock, but that *should* work because it does nothing.
- */
- rt_mutex_pre_schedule();
rt_mutex_init_waiter(&rt_waiter);
@@ -1146,10 +1140,6 @@ int futex_lock_pi(u32 __user *uaddr, unsigned int flags, ktime_t *time, int tryl
* the
*/
futex_q_lockptr_lock(&q);
- /*
- * Waiter is unqueued.
- */
- rt_mutex_post_schedule();
no_block:
/*
* Fixup the pi_state owner and possibly acquire the lock if we
diff --git a/kernel/locking/rtmutex_api.c b/kernel/locking/rtmutex_api.c
index 5d48d64725b12..eb18b094473c9 100644
--- a/kernel/locking/rtmutex_api.c
+++ b/kernel/locking/rtmutex_api.c
@@ -423,6 +423,7 @@ int __sched rt_mutex_wait_proxy_lock(struct rt_mutex_base *lock,
{
int ret;
+ rt_mutex_futex_pre_schedule();
raw_spin_lock_irq(&lock->wait_lock);
/* sleep on the mutex */
set_current_state(TASK_INTERRUPTIBLE);
@@ -433,6 +434,7 @@ int __sched rt_mutex_wait_proxy_lock(struct rt_mutex_base *lock,
*/
fixup_rt_mutex_waiters(lock, true);
raw_spin_unlock_irq(&lock->wait_lock);
+ rt_mutex_futex_post_schedule();
return ret;
}
diff --git a/kernel/sched/core.c b/kernel/sched/core.c
index f78275192036b..449ccd871be81 100644
--- a/kernel/sched/core.c
+++ b/kernel/sched/core.c
@@ -7637,6 +7637,17 @@ void rt_mutex_pre_schedule(void)
sched_submit_work(current);
}
+/*
+ * Used within the futex syscall context, skips sched_submit_work() because none
+ * its work will be done. Asserts ensure that it is indeed the case.
+ */
+void rt_mutex_futex_pre_schedule(void)
+{
+ lockdep_assert(!(current->flags & (PF_WQ_WORKER | PF_IO_WORKER)));
+ lockdep_assert(!current->plug);
+ lockdep_assert(!fetch_and_set(current->sched_rt_mutex, 1));
+}
+
void rt_mutex_schedule(void)
{
lockdep_assert(current->sched_rt_mutex);
@@ -7649,6 +7660,11 @@ void rt_mutex_post_schedule(void)
lockdep_assert(fetch_and_set(current->sched_rt_mutex, 0));
}
+void rt_mutex_futex_post_schedule(void)
+{
+ lockdep_assert(fetch_and_set(current->sched_rt_mutex, 0));
+}
+
/*
* rt_mutex_setprio - set the current priority of a task
* @p: task to boost
--
2.55.0
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2026-09-01 13:55 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 6+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2026-09-01 13:54 [PATCH v4 0/2] futex: Address two futex-requeue-pi issues Sebastian Andrzej Siewior
2026-09-01 13:54 ` Sebastian Andrzej Siewior [this message]
2026-09-01 13:56 ` [PATCH v4 1/2] futex: Provide rt_mutex_.*_schedule() equivalents for futex scheduling Sebastian Andrzej Siewior
2026-09-04 6:15 ` [tip: locking/urgent] " tip-bot2 for Sebastian Andrzej Siewior
2026-09-01 13:54 ` [PATCH v4 2/2] futex: Prevent rcuwait use-after-free during requeue PI Sebastian Andrzej Siewior
2026-09-04 6:15 ` [tip: locking/urgent] " tip-bot2 for Yao Kai
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20260901135453.3121948-2-bigeasy@linutronix.de \
--to=bigeasy@linutronix.de \
--cc=andrealmeid@igalia.com \
--cc=bp@alien8.de \
--cc=dave@stgolabs.net \
--cc=dvhart@infradead.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mingo@redhat.com \
--cc=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
--cc=yaokai34@huawei.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox
all inboxes | Powered by JetHome®