[PATCH v2] io_uring/lock: Keep spinlock release before wake_up()

[PATCH v2] io_uring/lock: Keep spinlock release before wake_up()

[Xiaochuan Li]

When CONFIG_PREEMPT_RT enable, raw_spin_lock() will preempt_disable()
-> raw_spin_lock()
-> wake_up()
  ...
  -> spin_lock_irqsave()

which will trigger:
BUG: sleeping function called from invalid context at kernel/locking/spinlock_rt.c:46
in_atomic(): 1, irqs_disabled(): 0, non_block: 0, pid: 985654, name: iou-wrk-983605
preempt_count: 1, expected: 0
RCU nest depth: 0, expected: 0
CPU: 3 PID: 985654 Comm: iou-wrk-983605 Tainted: G        O  6.1.83-rt28-g19631eb82f21
stack:0        ppid:977479 flags:0x00000008
tgid:977553 prio:120 preempt:0x100000001 rcu_read_lock_nesting:0
used_cpu 3 wake_cpu 3 on_cpu 3 on_rq 1 migrate_dis 0
arrive:17423426040675 queued:0 prev_sum:33955300 sum_exec:33955300
Call trace:
 dump_backtrace.part.0+0xdc/0xec
 show_stack+0x1c/0x30
 dump_stack_lvl+0xac/0xc4
 dump_stack+0x14/0x30
 __might_resched+0x13c/0x170
 rt_spin_lock+0x34/0xc0
 __wake_up_common_lock+0x68/0xd0
 __wake_up+0x1c/0x24
 io_worker_handle_work+0x5b0/0x600
 io_wqe_worker+0xf4/0x310
 ret_from_fork+0x10/0x20

Signed-off-by: Xiaochuan Li <chuanx2070@163.com>
---
Changes in v2:
io_uring/io-wq: fix lockdep warning by deferring hash wake up outside acct->lock

The stall wake up path in io_get_next_work() holds acct->lock while
calling wake_up() on the hash wait queue, which creates lock ordering
acct->lock -> hash->wait.lock and triggers lockdep circular dependency
warning.

The previous approach of temporarily dropping and retaking acct->lock
is racy and juggles the lock unnecessarily. Instead, add a need_wake
output flag to io_get_next_work() and defer the wake_up() to the outer
worker loop, after acct->lock has been released.

This preserves the calling convention that io_get_next_work() returns
with acct->lock held, removes the lock inversion, and avoids any racy
sleeper checks outside of the lock. Drop the wq_has_sleeper check as
bare wake_up is safe and the optimization is not worth the complexity.

 io_uring/io-wq.c | 12 ++++++++----
 1 file changed, 8 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)

diff --git a/io_uring/io-wq.c b/io_uring/io-wq.c
index 2ca223e47d41..7a167f409379 100644
--- a/io_uring/io-wq.c
+++ b/io_uring/io-wq.c
@@ -526,7 +526,8 @@ static bool io_wait_on_hash(struct io_wq *wq, unsigned int hash)
 }
 
 static struct io_wq_work *io_get_next_work(struct io_wq_acct *acct,
-					   struct io_wq *wq)
+					   struct io_wq *wq
+					   bool *need_wake)
 	__must_hold(acct->lock)
 {
 	struct io_wq_work_node *node, *prev;
@@ -574,9 +575,8 @@ static struct io_wq_work *io_get_next_work(struct io_wq_acct *acct,
 		unstalled = io_wait_on_hash(wq, stall_hash);
 		raw_spin_lock(&acct->lock);
 		if (unstalled) {
+			*need_wake = true;
 			clear_bit(IO_ACCT_STALLED_BIT, &acct->flags);
-			if (wq_has_sleeper(&wq->hash->wait))
-				wake_up(&wq->hash->wait);
 		}
 	}
 
@@ -607,6 +607,7 @@ static void io_worker_handle_work(struct io_wq_acct *acct,
 
 	do {
 		struct io_wq_work *work;
+		bool need_wake = false;
 
 		/*
 		 * If we got some work, mark us as busy. If we didn't, but
@@ -615,7 +616,7 @@ static void io_worker_handle_work(struct io_wq_acct *acct,
 		 * can't make progress, any work completion or insertion will
 		 * clear the stalled flag.
 		 */
-		work = io_get_next_work(acct, wq);
+		work = io_get_next_work(acct, wq, &need_wake);
 		if (work) {
 			/*
 			 * Make sure cancelation can find this, even before
@@ -631,6 +632,9 @@ static void io_worker_handle_work(struct io_wq_acct *acct,
 
 		raw_spin_unlock(&acct->lock);
 
+		if (need_wake)
+			wake_up(&wq->hash->wait);
+
 		if (!work)
 			break;
 

base-commit: a8c591ed6b672915e0be57843f943a2a723aff40
-- 
2.43.0

[PATCH v2] io_uring/lock: Keep spinlock release before wake_up()

[Xiaochuan Li]

When CONFIG_PREEMPT_RT enable, raw_spin_lock() will preempt_disable()
-> raw_spin_lock()
-> wake_up()
  ...
  -> spin_lock_irqsave()

which will trigger:
BUG: sleeping function called from invalid context at kernel/locking/spinlock_rt.c:46
in_atomic(): 1, irqs_disabled(): 0, non_block: 0, pid: 985654, name: iou-wrk-983605
preempt_count: 1, expected: 0
RCU nest depth: 0, expected: 0
CPU: 3 PID: 985654 Comm: iou-wrk-983605 Tainted: G        O  6.1.83-rt28-g19631eb82f21
stack:0        ppid:977479 flags:0x00000008
tgid:977553 prio:120 preempt:0x100000001 rcu_read_lock_nesting:0
used_cpu 3 wake_cpu 3 on_cpu 3 on_rq 1 migrate_dis 0
arrive:17423426040675 queued:0 prev_sum:33955300 sum_exec:33955300
Call trace:
 dump_backtrace.part.0+0xdc/0xec
 show_stack+0x1c/0x30
 dump_stack_lvl+0xac/0xc4
 dump_stack+0x14/0x30
 __might_resched+0x13c/0x170
 rt_spin_lock+0x34/0xc0
 __wake_up_common_lock+0x68/0xd0
 __wake_up+0x1c/0x24
 io_worker_handle_work+0x5b0/0x600
 io_wqe_worker+0xf4/0x310
 ret_from_fork+0x10/0x20

Signed-off-by: Xiaochuan Li <chuanx2070@163.com>
---
Changes in v2:
- Defer wake_up() after releasing acct->lock, add need_wake flag
- Drop wq_has_sleeper() check, bare wake_up() is safe

This is v2 of the previous submission. The v1 patch didn't show up on lore.kernel.org, no archived thread available.

io_uring/io-wq: fix lockdep warning by deferring hash wake up outside acct->lock

The stall wake up path in io_get_next_work() holds acct->lock while
calling wake_up() on the hash wait queue, which creates lock ordering
acct->lock -> hash->wait.lock and triggers lockdep circular dependency
warning.

The previous approach of temporarily dropping and retaking acct->lock
is racy and juggles the lock unnecessarily. Instead, add a need_wake
output flag to io_get_next_work() and defer the wake_up() to the outer
worker loop, after acct->lock has been released.

This preserves the calling convention that io_get_next_work() returns
with acct->lock held, removes the lock inversion, and avoids any racy
sleeper checks outside of the lock. Drop the wq_has_sleeper check as
bare wake_up is safe and the optimization is not worth the complexity.

 io_uring/io-wq.c | 12 ++++++++----
 1 file changed, 8 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)

diff --git a/io_uring/io-wq.c b/io_uring/io-wq.c
index 2ca223e47d41..dbab506dd642 100644
--- a/io_uring/io-wq.c
+++ b/io_uring/io-wq.c
@@ -526,7 +526,8 @@ static bool io_wait_on_hash(struct io_wq *wq, unsigned int hash)
 }
 
 static struct io_wq_work *io_get_next_work(struct io_wq_acct *acct,
-					   struct io_wq *wq)
+					   struct io_wq *wq,
+					   bool *need_wake)
 	__must_hold(acct->lock)
 {
 	struct io_wq_work_node *node, *prev;
@@ -574,9 +575,8 @@ static struct io_wq_work *io_get_next_work(struct io_wq_acct *acct,
 		unstalled = io_wait_on_hash(wq, stall_hash);
 		raw_spin_lock(&acct->lock);
 		if (unstalled) {
+			*need_wake = true;
 			clear_bit(IO_ACCT_STALLED_BIT, &acct->flags);
-			if (wq_has_sleeper(&wq->hash->wait))
-				wake_up(&wq->hash->wait);
 		}
 	}
 
@@ -607,6 +607,7 @@ static void io_worker_handle_work(struct io_wq_acct *acct,
 
 	do {
 		struct io_wq_work *work;
+		bool need_wake = false;
 
 		/*
 		 * If we got some work, mark us as busy. If we didn't, but
@@ -615,7 +616,7 @@ static void io_worker_handle_work(struct io_wq_acct *acct,
 		 * can't make progress, any work completion or insertion will
 		 * clear the stalled flag.
 		 */
-		work = io_get_next_work(acct, wq);
+		work = io_get_next_work(acct, wq, &need_wake);
 		if (work) {
 			/*
 			 * Make sure cancelation can find this, even before
@@ -631,6 +632,9 @@ static void io_worker_handle_work(struct io_wq_acct *acct,
 
 		raw_spin_unlock(&acct->lock);
 
+		if (need_wake)
+			wake_up(&wq->hash->wait);
+
 		if (!work)
 			break;
 

base-commit: a8c591ed6b672915e0be57843f943a2a723aff40
-- 
2.43.0

Re: [PATCH v2] io_uring/lock: Keep spinlock release before wake_up()

[Jens Axboe]

On 9/23/26 10:16 AM, Xiaochuan Li wrote:
> @@ -574,9 +575,8 @@ static struct io_wq_work *io_get_next_work(struct io_wq_acct *acct,
>  		unstalled = io_wait_on_hash(wq, stall_hash);
>  		raw_spin_lock(&acct->lock);
>  		if (unstalled) {
> +			*need_wake = true;
>  			clear_bit(IO_ACCT_STALLED_BIT, &acct->flags);
> -			if (wq_has_sleeper(&wq->hash->wait))
> -				wake_up(&wq->hash->wait);
>  		}
>  	}

*need_wake = wq_has_sleeper(&wq->hash->wait);

? And probably retain the sme ordering with the bit clear.

Apart from that, I think it looks fine. The lock shuffling is somewhat
annoying and inefficient, an unfortunate side effect of the raw vs
normal spinlocks.

-- 
Jens Axboe

[PATCH v3] io_uring/lock: Keep spinlock release before wake_up()

[Xiaochuan Li]

When CONFIG_PREEMPT_RT enable, raw_spin_lock() will preempt_disable()
-> raw_spin_lock()
-> wake_up()
  ...
  -> spin_lock_irqsave()

which will trigger:
BUG: sleeping function called from invalid context at kernel/locking/spinlock_rt.c:46
in_atomic(): 1, irqs_disabled(): 0, non_block: 0, pid: 985654, name: iou-wrk-983605
preempt_count: 1, expected: 0
RCU nest depth: 0, expected: 0
CPU: 3 PID: 985654 Comm: iou-wrk-983605 Tainted: G        O  6.1.83-rt28-g19631eb82f21
stack:0        ppid:977479 flags:0x00000008
tgid:977553 prio:120 preempt:0x100000001 rcu_read_lock_nesting:0
used_cpu 3 wake_cpu 3 on_cpu 3 on_rq 1 migrate_dis 0
arrive:17423426040675 queued:0 prev_sum:33955300 sum_exec:33955300
Call trace:
 dump_backtrace.part.0+0xdc/0xec
 show_stack+0x1c/0x30
 dump_stack_lvl+0xac/0xc4
 dump_stack+0x14/0x30
 __might_resched+0x13c/0x170
 rt_spin_lock+0x34/0xc0
 __wake_up_common_lock+0x68/0xd0
 __wake_up+0x1c/0x24
 io_worker_handle_work+0x5b0/0x600
 io_wqe_worker+0xf4/0x310
 ret_from_fork+0x10/0x20

Signed-off-by: Xiaochuan Li <chuanx2070@163.com>
---
Changes in v3:
- Defer wake_up() after releasing acct->lock, add need_wake flag
- keep need_wake from wq_has_sleeper() in the same order

The v1 patch didn't show up on lore.kernel.org

Link: [https://lore.kernel.org/io-uring/20260923164849.135000-1-chuanx2070@163.com/T/#t]

 io_uring/io-wq.c | 12 ++++++++----
 1 file changed, 8 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)

diff --git a/io_uring/io-wq.c b/io_uring/io-wq.c
index 2ca223e47d41..2dadde0ca395 100644
--- a/io_uring/io-wq.c
+++ b/io_uring/io-wq.c
@@ -526,7 +526,8 @@ static bool io_wait_on_hash(struct io_wq *wq, unsigned int hash)
 }
 
 static struct io_wq_work *io_get_next_work(struct io_wq_acct *acct,
-					   struct io_wq *wq)
+					   struct io_wq *wq,
+					   bool *need_wake)
 	__must_hold(acct->lock)
 {
 	struct io_wq_work_node *node, *prev;
@@ -575,8 +576,7 @@ static struct io_wq_work *io_get_next_work(struct io_wq_acct *acct,
 		raw_spin_lock(&acct->lock);
 		if (unstalled) {
 			clear_bit(IO_ACCT_STALLED_BIT, &acct->flags);
-			if (wq_has_sleeper(&wq->hash->wait))
-				wake_up(&wq->hash->wait);
+			*need_wake = wq_has_sleeper(&wq->hash->wait);
 		}
 	}
 
@@ -607,6 +607,7 @@ static void io_worker_handle_work(struct io_wq_acct *acct,
 
 	do {
 		struct io_wq_work *work;
+		bool need_wake = false;
 
 		/*
 		 * If we got some work, mark us as busy. If we didn't, but
@@ -615,7 +616,7 @@ static void io_worker_handle_work(struct io_wq_acct *acct,
 		 * can't make progress, any work completion or insertion will
 		 * clear the stalled flag.
 		 */
-		work = io_get_next_work(acct, wq);
+		work = io_get_next_work(acct, wq, &need_wake);
 		if (work) {
 			/*
 			 * Make sure cancelation can find this, even before
@@ -631,6 +632,9 @@ static void io_worker_handle_work(struct io_wq_acct *acct,
 
 		raw_spin_unlock(&acct->lock);
 
+		if (need_wake)
+			wake_up(&wq->hash->wait);
+
 		if (!work)
 			break;
 

base-commit: a8c591ed6b672915e0be57843f943a2a723aff40
-- 
2.43.0

Re: [PATCH v3] io_uring/lock: Keep spinlock release before wake_up()

[Jens Axboe]

On Thu, 24 Sep 2026 01:20:32 +0800, Xiaochuan Li wrote:
> When CONFIG_PREEMPT_RT enable, raw_spin_lock() will preempt_disable()
> -> raw_spin_lock()
> -> wake_up()
>   ...
>   -> spin_lock_irqsave()
> 
> which will trigger:
> BUG: sleeping function called from invalid context at kernel/locking/spinlock_rt.c:46
> in_atomic(): 1, irqs_disabled(): 0, non_block: 0, pid: 985654, name: iou-wrk-983605
> preempt_count: 1, expected: 0
> RCU nest depth: 0, expected: 0
> CPU: 3 PID: 985654 Comm: iou-wrk-983605 Tainted: G        O  6.1.83-rt28-g19631eb82f21
> stack:0        ppid:977479 flags:0x00000008
> tgid:977553 prio:120 preempt:0x100000001 rcu_read_lock_nesting:0
> used_cpu 3 wake_cpu 3 on_cpu 3 on_rq 1 migrate_dis 0
> arrive:17423426040675 queued:0 prev_sum:33955300 sum_exec:33955300
> Call trace:
>  dump_backtrace.part.0+0xdc/0xec
>  show_stack+0x1c/0x30
>  dump_stack_lvl+0xac/0xc4
>  dump_stack+0x14/0x30
>  __might_resched+0x13c/0x170
>  rt_spin_lock+0x34/0xc0
>  __wake_up_common_lock+0x68/0xd0
>  __wake_up+0x1c/0x24
>  io_worker_handle_work+0x5b0/0x600
>  io_wqe_worker+0xf4/0x310
>  ret_from_fork+0x10/0x20
> 
> [...]

Applied, thanks!

[1/1] io_uring/lock: Keep spinlock release before wake_up()
      commit: 8dc68de64261e599631aa7ed6cdf3aec07c7ae3d

Best regards,
-- 
Jens Axboe

Re: [PATCH v2] io_uring/lock: Keep spinlock release before wake_up()

[Gabriel Krisman Bertazi]

Xiaochuan Li <chuanx2070@163.com> writes:

> When CONFIG_PREEMPT_RT enable, raw_spin_lock() will preempt_disable()

The subject prefix is wrong.  It should be "io_uring/io-wq".

Also, It might be that I just didn't find it, but was there a v1 of this
patch?  I can't find it on the list.

> which will trigger:
> BUG: sleeping function called from invalid context at kernel/locking/spinlock_rt.c:46
> in_atomic(): 1, irqs_disabled(): 0, non_block: 0, pid: 985654, name: iou-wrk-983605
> preempt_count: 1, expected: 0
> RCU nest depth: 0, expected: 0
> CPU: 3 PID: 985654 Comm: iou-wrk-983605 Tainted: G        O  6.1.83-rt28-g19631eb82f21
> stack:0        ppid:977479 flags:0x00000008
> tgid:977553 prio:120 preempt:0x100000001 rcu_read_lock_nesting:0
> used_cpu 3 wake_cpu 3 on_cpu 3 on_rq 1 migrate_dis 0
> arrive:17423426040675 queued:0 prev_sum:33955300 sum_exec:33955300
> Call trace:
>  dump_backtrace.part.0+0xdc/0xec
>  show_stack+0x1c/0x30
>  dump_stack_lvl+0xac/0xc4
>  dump_stack+0x14/0x30
>  __might_resched+0x13c/0x170
>  rt_spin_lock+0x34/0xc0
>  __wake_up_common_lock+0x68/0xd0
>  __wake_up+0x1c/0x24
>  io_worker_handle_work+0x5b0/0x600
>  io_wqe_worker+0xf4/0x310
>  ret_from_fork+0x10/0x20
>
> Signed-off-by: Xiaochuan Li <chuanx2070@163.com>
> ---
> Changes in v2:
> io_uring/io-wq: fix lockdep warning by deferring hash wake up outside acct->lock
>
> The stall wake up path in io_get_next_work() holds acct->lock while
> calling wake_up() on the hash wait queue, which creates lock ordering
> acct->lock -> hash->wait.lock and triggers lockdep circular dependency
> warning.
>
> The previous approach of temporarily dropping and retaking acct->lock
> is racy and juggles the lock unnecessarily. Instead, add a need_wake
> output flag to io_get_next_work() and defer the wake_up() to the outer
> worker loop, after acct->lock has been released.

what previous approach?

>
> This preserves the calling convention that io_get_next_work() returns
> with acct->lock held, removes the lock inversion, and avoids any racy
> sleeper checks outside of the lock. Drop the wq_has_sleeper check as
> bare wake_up is safe and the optimization is not worth the complexity.

Either way, these paragraphs should be part of the commit message. By
putting them after the ---, they get dropped at commit-time.

-- 
Gabriel Krisman Bertazi

Re: [PATCH v2] io_uring/lock: Keep spinlock release before wake_up()

[Jens Axboe]

On 9/23/26 3:13 PM, Gabriel Krisman Bertazi wrote:
> Xiaochuan Li <chuanx2070@163.com> writes:
> 
>> When CONFIG_PREEMPT_RT enable, raw_spin_lock() will preempt_disable()
> 
> The subject prefix is wrong.  It should be "io_uring/io-wq".
> 
> Also, It might be that I just didn't find it, but was there a v1 of this
> patch?  I can't find it on the list.

There should be a v1 and a v2, off the same thread.

>> which will trigger:
>> BUG: sleeping function called from invalid context at kernel/locking/spinlock_rt.c:46
>> in_atomic(): 1, irqs_disabled(): 0, non_block: 0, pid: 985654, name: iou-wrk-983605
>> preempt_count: 1, expected: 0
>> RCU nest depth: 0, expected: 0
>> CPU: 3 PID: 985654 Comm: iou-wrk-983605 Tainted: G        O  6.1.83-rt28-g19631eb82f21
>> stack:0        ppid:977479 flags:0x00000008
>> tgid:977553 prio:120 preempt:0x100000001 rcu_read_lock_nesting:0
>> used_cpu 3 wake_cpu 3 on_cpu 3 on_rq 1 migrate_dis 0
>> arrive:17423426040675 queued:0 prev_sum:33955300 sum_exec:33955300
>> Call trace:
>>  dump_backtrace.part.0+0xdc/0xec
>>  show_stack+0x1c/0x30
>>  dump_stack_lvl+0xac/0xc4
>>  dump_stack+0x14/0x30
>>  __might_resched+0x13c/0x170
>>  rt_spin_lock+0x34/0xc0
>>  __wake_up_common_lock+0x68/0xd0
>>  __wake_up+0x1c/0x24
>>  io_worker_handle_work+0x5b0/0x600
>>  io_wqe_worker+0xf4/0x310
>>  ret_from_fork+0x10/0x20
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Xiaochuan Li <chuanx2070@163.com>
>> ---
>> Changes in v2:
>> io_uring/io-wq: fix lockdep warning by deferring hash wake up outside acct->lock
>>
>> The stall wake up path in io_get_next_work() holds acct->lock while
>> calling wake_up() on the hash wait queue, which creates lock ordering
>> acct->lock -> hash->wait.lock and triggers lockdep circular dependency
>> warning.
>>
>> The previous approach of temporarily dropping and retaking acct->lock
>> is racy and juggles the lock unnecessarily. Instead, add a need_wake
>> output flag to io_get_next_work() and defer the wake_up() to the outer
>> worker loop, after acct->lock has been released.
> 
> what previous approach?
> 
>>
>> This preserves the calling convention that io_get_next_work() returns
>> with acct->lock held, removes the lock inversion, and avoids any racy
>> sleeper checks outside of the lock. Drop the wq_has_sleeper check as
>> bare wake_up is safe and the optimization is not worth the complexity.
> 
> Either way, these paragraphs should be part of the commit message. By
> putting them after the ---, they get dropped at commit-time.

I rewrote most of the commit message when applying, fwiw. You can find
it in my tree.

-- 
Jens Axboe

Re: [PATCH v3] io_uring/lock: Keep spinlock release before wake_up()

[Sebastian Andrzej Siewior]

On 2026-09-23 11:37:18 [-0600], Jens Axboe wrote:
> Applied, thanks!
> 
> [1/1] io_uring/lock: Keep spinlock release before wake_up()
>       commit: 8dc68de64261e599631aa7ed6cdf3aec07c7ae3d

Thank you both. Any chance for a Fixes line?

> Best regards,

Sebastian