[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20240731203344.GA42857@maniforge>
Date: Wed, 31 Jul 2024 15:33:44 -0500
From: David Vernet <void@...ifault.com>
To: Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>
Cc: "Zhangqiao (2012 lab)" <zhangqiao22@...wei.com>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, kernel-team@...a.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH sched_ext/for-6.12] sched_ext: Allow p->scx.disallow only
while loading
On Wed, Jul 31, 2024 at 09:14:52AM -1000, Tejun Heo wrote:
> p->scx.disallow provides a way for the BPF scheduler to reject certain tasks
> from attaching. It's currently allowed for both the load and fork paths;
> however, the latter doesn't actually work as p->sched_class is already set
> by the time scx_ops_init_task() is called during fork.
>
> This is a convenience feature which is mostly useful from the load path
> anyway. Allow it only from the load path.
>
> Signed-off-by: Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>
> Reported-by: "Zhangqiao (2012 lab)" <zhangqiao22@...wei.com>
> Link: http://lkml.kernel.org/r/20240711110720.1285-1-zhangqiao22@huawei.com
> Fixes: 7bb6f0810ecf ("sched_ext: Allow BPF schedulers to disallow specific tasks from joining SCHED_EXT")
> ---
> include/linux/sched/ext.h | 11 ++++++-----
> kernel/sched/ext.c | 14 ++++++++------
> 2 files changed, 14 insertions(+), 11 deletions(-)
>
> --- a/include/linux/sched/ext.h
> +++ b/include/linux/sched/ext.h
> @@ -181,11 +181,12 @@ struct sched_ext_entity {
> * If set, reject future sched_setscheduler(2) calls updating the policy
> * to %SCHED_EXT with -%EACCES.
> *
> - * If set from ops.init_task() and the task's policy is already
> - * %SCHED_EXT, which can happen while the BPF scheduler is being loaded
> - * or by inhering the parent's policy during fork, the task's policy is
> - * rejected and forcefully reverted to %SCHED_NORMAL. The number of
> - * such events are reported through /sys/kernel/debug/sched_ext::nr_rejected.
> + * Can be set from ops.init_task() while the BPF scheduler is being
> + * loaded (!scx_init_task_args->fork). If set and the task's policy is
> + * already %SCHED_EXT, the task's policy is rejected and forcefully
> + * reverted to %SCHED_NORMAL. The number of such events are reported
> + * through /sys/kernel/debug/sched_ext::nr_rejected. Setting this flag
> + * during fork is not allowed.
> */
> bool disallow; /* reject switching into SCX */
>
> --- a/kernel/sched/ext.c
> +++ b/kernel/sched/ext.c
> @@ -3399,18 +3399,17 @@ static int scx_ops_init_task(struct task
>
> scx_set_task_state(p, SCX_TASK_INIT);
>
> - if (p->scx.disallow) {
> + if (!fork && p->scx.disallow) {
> struct rq *rq;
> struct rq_flags rf;
>
> rq = task_rq_lock(p, &rf);
>
> /*
> - * We're either in fork or load path and @p->policy will be
> - * applied right after. Reverting @p->policy here and rejecting
> - * %SCHED_EXT transitions from scx_check_setscheduler()
> - * guarantees that if ops.init_task() sets @p->disallow, @p can
> - * never be in SCX.
> + * We're in the load path and @p->policy will be applied right
> + * after. Reverting @p->policy here and rejecting %SCHED_EXT
> + * transitions from scx_check_setscheduler() guarantees that if
> + * ops.init_task() sets @p->disallow, @p can never be in SCX.
> */
> if (p->policy == SCHED_EXT) {
> p->policy = SCHED_NORMAL;
> @@ -3418,6 +3417,9 @@ static int scx_ops_init_task(struct task
> }
>
> task_rq_unlock(rq, p, &rf);
> + } else if (p->scx.disallow) {
Just to make it a bit easier on schedulers, should we do this:
} else if (p->scx.disallow && p->policy == SCHED_EXT)
That way if you have a task that isn't running with SCHED_EXT and forks,
the scheduler can set p->scx.disallow without having to check that it's
being set in a fork. Seems unnecessary to enforce that given that the
end result is the same.
Otherwise this LG. Feel free to apply if you agree, and add my ack:
Acked-by: David Vernet <void@...ifault.com>
Thanks,
David
Download attachment "signature.asc" of type "application/pgp-signature" (229 bytes)
Powered by blists - more mailing lists