[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <46cef95e02d64b35a9d9d51d5debee22@honor.com>
Date: Fri, 18 Jul 2025 09:06:46 +0000
From: liuwenfang <liuwenfang@...or.com>
To: 'Tejun Heo' <tj@...nel.org>
CC: 'David Vernet' <void@...ifault.com>, 'Andrea Righi' <arighi@...dia.com>,
'Changwoo Min' <changwoo@...lia.com>, 'Ingo Molnar' <mingo@...hat.com>,
'Peter Zijlstra' <peterz@...radead.org>, 'Juri Lelli'
<juri.lelli@...hat.com>, 'Vincent Guittot' <vincent.guittot@...aro.org>,
'Dietmar Eggemann' <dietmar.eggemann@....com>, 'Steven Rostedt'
<rostedt@...dmis.org>, 'Ben Segall' <bsegall@...gle.com>, 'Mel Gorman'
<mgorman@...e.de>, 'Valentin Schneider' <vschneid@...hat.com>,
"'linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org'" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: RE: [PATCH v2 2/2] sched_ext: Fix cpu_released while changing sched
policy of the running task
> Hello,
>
> On Sat, Jun 28, 2025 at 07:20:59AM +0000, liuwenfang wrote:
> > static void switched_from_scx(struct rq *rq, struct task_struct *p)
> > {
> > + switch_class(rq, p, true);
> > +
> > scx_ops_disable_task(p);
> > }
>
> Hmm... but this function can be called when @p is not currently running from
> setscheduler() path, and it wouldn't make sense to call switch_class() during
> that.
Yeah, task_current(rq, p) should be checked here.
>
> > static void wakeup_preempt_scx(struct rq *rq, struct task_struct
> > *p,int wake_flags) {} -static void switched_to_scx(struct rq *rq,
> > struct task_struct *p) {}
> > +static void switched_to_scx(struct rq *rq, struct task_struct *p) {
> > + lockdep_assert_rq_held(rq);
> > +
> > + if (static_branch_unlikely(&scx_ops_cpu_preempt) &&
> > + unlikely(rq->scx.cpu_released)) {
> > + /*
> > + * If the previous sched_class for the current CPU was not SCX,
> > + * notify the BPF scheduler that it again has control of the
> > + * core. This callback complements ->cpu_release(), which is
> > + * emitted in switch_class().
> > + */
> > + if (SCX_HAS_OP(cpu_acquire))
> > + SCX_CALL_OP(SCX_KF_REST, cpu_acquire, rq, cpu_of(rq), NULL);
> > + rq->scx.cpu_released = false;
> > + }
> > +}
>
> Ditto. This should only apply if @p is current, right?
task_current(rq, p) should be added.
>
> Thanks.
>
> --
> Tejun
Thanks.
--
Wenfang
Powered by blists - more mailing lists