[PATCH -v2 14/17] sched, lockdep: Annotate ->pi_lock recursion
From: Peter Zijlstra
Date: Mon Oct 05 2020 - 11:10:50 EST
There's a valid ->pi_lock recursion issue where the actual PI code
tries to wake up the stop task. Make lockdep aware so it doesn't
complain about this.
Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
---
kernel/sched/core.c | 15 +++++++++++++++
1 file changed, 15 insertions(+)
--- a/kernel/sched/core.c
+++ b/kernel/sched/core.c
@@ -2602,6 +2602,7 @@ int select_task_rq(struct task_struct *p
void sched_set_stop_task(int cpu, struct task_struct *stop)
{
+ static struct lock_class_key stop_pi_lock;
struct sched_param param = { .sched_priority = MAX_RT_PRIO - 1 };
struct task_struct *old_stop = cpu_rq(cpu)->stop;
@@ -2617,6 +2618,20 @@ void sched_set_stop_task(int cpu, struct
sched_setscheduler_nocheck(stop, SCHED_FIFO, ¶m);
stop->sched_class = &stop_sched_class;
+
+ /*
+ * The PI code calls rt_mutex_setprio() with ->pi_lock held to
+ * adjust the effective priority of a task. As a result,
+ * rt_mutex_setprio() can trigger (RT) balancing operations,
+ * which can then trigger wakeups of the stop thread to push
+ * around the current task.
+ *
+ * The stop task itself will never be part of the PI-chain, it
+ * never blocks, therefore that ->pi_lock recursion is safe.
+ * Tell lockdep about this by placing the stop->pi_lock in its
+ * own class.
+ */
+ lockdep_set_class(&stop->pi_lock, &stop_pi_lock);
}
cpu_rq(cpu)->stop = stop;