[PATCH v3 14/19] sched, lockdep: Annotate ->pi_lock recursion

[Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>]

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@infradead.org>
---
 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, &param);
 
 		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;