mm/slub: hold cpus_read_lock around flush_rcu_sheaves_on_cache()

flush_rcu_sheaves_on_cache() calls queue_work_on() in a
for_each_online_cpu() loop, which requires the cpu to stay online.
But cpus_read_lock() is not held in kvfree_rcu_barrier_on_cache() and the
set of "online cpus" is subject to change.

There are two paths that call flush_rcu_sheaves_on_cache():

  // has cpus_read_lock()
  flush_all_rcu_sheaves()
    -> flush_rcu_sheaves_on_cache()

  // no cpus_read_lock()
  kvfree_rcu_barrier_on_cache()
    -> flush_rcu_sheaves_on_cache()

Fix this by holding cpus_read_lock() in kvfree_rcu_barrier_on_cache().

Why not move cpus_read_lock() from flush_all_rcu_sheaves() into
flush_rcu_sheaves_on_cache()? The reason is it would introduce a new lock
order (slab_mutex -> cpu_hotplug_lock). The reverse order
(cpu_hotplug_lock -> slab_mutex) is established by

- cpuhp_setup_state_nocalls(..., slub_cpu_setup, ...)
- kmem_cache_destroy()

The two orders together would form an AB-BA deadlock.

Finally, add lockdep_assert_cpus_held() in flush_rcu_sheaves_on_cache()
to catch the same problem in the future.

Fixes: 0f35040d ("mm/slab: introduce kvfree_rcu_barrier_on_cache() for cache destruction")
Cc: <stable@vger.kernel.org>
Signed-off-by: Qing Wang <wangqing7171@gmail.com>
Link: https://patch.msgid.link/20260512035035.762317-1-wangqing7171@gmail.com


Signed-off-by: Vlastimil Babka (SUSE) <vbabka@kernel.org>