Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 23.128.96.18 as permitted sender) client-ip=23.128.96.18;
From:   Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
To:     Andy Lutomirski <luto@kernel.org>,
        Andy Lutomirski <luto@kernel.org>
Cc:     Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>,
        LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
        Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>,
        Sebastian Andrzej Siewior <bigeasy@linutronix.de>,
        Masami Hiramatsu <mhiramat@kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [patch 4/5] sched: Delay task stack freeing on RT
In-Reply-To: <CALCETrXk0i50vyWwou0AT0jtb7V2pqZiJW_7_dqrthi1N19qeg@mail.gmail.com>
References: <20210928122339.502270600@linutronix.de>
 <20210928122411.593486363@linutronix.de>
 <YVRT6QbX5zwiIJkI@hirez.programming.kicks-ass.net>
 <CALCETrVP3asoqWyNqEe+rDs+YECd9gnp9eFb1==X0140oMZ41g@mail.gmail.com>
 <87o8884q02.ffs@tglx>
 <CALCETrU7Fu7BA+DEk8HJPRkqsOSsC-NXR2tPsxW6VFF0pxSS6A@mail.gmail.com>
 <CALCETrXk0i50vyWwou0AT0jtb7V2pqZiJW_7_dqrthi1N19qeg@mail.gmail.com>
Date:   Fri, 01 Oct 2021 22:54:08 +0200
Message-ID: <87a6js4gb3.ffs@tglx>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain
Precedence: bulk

On Fri, Oct 01 2021 at 12:02, Andy Lutomirski wrote:
> On Fri, Oct 1, 2021 at 11:48 AM Andy Lutomirski <luto@kernel.org> wrote:
>>
>> On Fri, Oct 1, 2021 at 10:24 AM Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de> wrote:
>> >
>
>> ISTM it would be conceptually for do_exit() to handle its own freeing
>> in its own preemptible context.  Obviously that can't really work,
>> since we can't free a task_struct or a task stack while we're running
>> on it.  But I wonder if we could approximate it by putting this work
>> in a workqueue so that it all runs in a normal schedulable context.
>> To make the shell script case work nicely, we want to release the task
>> stack before notifying anyone waiting for the dying task to exit, but
>> maybe that's doable.  It could involve some nasty exit_signal hackery,
>> though.
>
> I'm making this way more complicated than it needs to be.  How about
> we unaccount the task stack in do_exit and release it for real in
> finish_task_switch()?  Other than accounting, free_thread_stack
> doesn't take any locks.

Right.