linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v5 2/3] sched_ext: Introduce scx_bpf_remote

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <aLaEDuOEPT_9VOMO@gpd4>
Date: Tue, 2 Sep 2025 07:43:42 +0200
From: Andrea Righi <arighi@...dia.com>
To: Christian Loehle <christian.loehle@....com>
Cc: tj@...nel.org, void@...ifault.com, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	sched-ext@...ts.linux.dev, changwoo@...lia.com, hodgesd@...a.com,
	mingo@...hat.com, peterz@...radead.org, jake@...lion.co.uk
Subject: Re: [PATCH v5 2/3] sched_ext: Introduce scx_bpf_remote_curr()

Hi Christian,

On Mon, Sep 01, 2025 at 02:26:03PM +0100, Christian Loehle wrote:
> Provide scx_bpf_remote_curr() as a way for scx schedulers to check the curr
> task of a remote rq without assuming its lock is held.
> 
> Many scx schedulers make use of scx_bpf_cpu_rq() to check a remote curr
> (e.g. to see if it should be preempted). This is problematic because
> scx_bpf_cpu_rq() provides access to all fields of struct rq, most of
> which aren't safe to use without holding the associated rq lock.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Christian Loehle <christian.loehle@....com>
> ---
>  kernel/sched/ext.c                       | 14 ++++++++++++++
>  tools/sched_ext/include/scx/common.bpf.h |  1 +
>  2 files changed, 15 insertions(+)
> 
> diff --git a/kernel/sched/ext.c b/kernel/sched/ext.c
> index 9fcc310d85d5..e242a2520f06 100644
> --- a/kernel/sched/ext.c
> +++ b/kernel/sched/ext.c
> @@ -7452,6 +7452,19 @@ __bpf_kfunc struct rq *scx_bpf_cpu_rq_locked(void)
>  	return rq;
>  }
>  
> +/**
> + * scx_bpf_remote_curr - Return remote CPU's curr task
> + * @cpu: CPU of interest
> + *
> + * Callers must hold RCU read lock (KF_RCU).
> + */
> +__bpf_kfunc struct task_struct *scx_bpf_remote_curr(s32 cpu)
> +{
> +	if (!kf_cpu_valid(cpu, NULL))
> +		return NULL;
> +	return READ_ONCE(cpu_rq(cpu)->curr);

It shouldn't be rcu_dereference(cpu_rq(cpu)->curr)?

Thanks,
-Andrea

> +}
> +
>  /**
>   * scx_bpf_task_cgroup - Return the sched cgroup of a task
>   * @p: task of interest
> @@ -7617,6 +7630,7 @@ BTF_ID_FLAGS(func, scx_bpf_task_running, KF_RCU)
>  BTF_ID_FLAGS(func, scx_bpf_task_cpu, KF_RCU)
>  BTF_ID_FLAGS(func, scx_bpf_cpu_rq)
>  BTF_ID_FLAGS(func, scx_bpf_cpu_rq_locked, KF_RET_NULL)
> +BTF_ID_FLAGS(func, scx_bpf_remote_curr, KF_RET_NULL | KF_RCU)
>  #ifdef CONFIG_CGROUP_SCHED
>  BTF_ID_FLAGS(func, scx_bpf_task_cgroup, KF_RCU | KF_ACQUIRE)
>  #endif
> diff --git a/tools/sched_ext/include/scx/common.bpf.h b/tools/sched_ext/include/scx/common.bpf.h
> index f5be06c93359..dd3d94256c10 100644
> --- a/tools/sched_ext/include/scx/common.bpf.h
> +++ b/tools/sched_ext/include/scx/common.bpf.h
> @@ -92,6 +92,7 @@ bool scx_bpf_task_running(const struct task_struct *p) __ksym;
>  s32 scx_bpf_task_cpu(const struct task_struct *p) __ksym;
>  struct rq *scx_bpf_cpu_rq(s32 cpu) __ksym;
>  struct rq *scx_bpf_cpu_rq_locked(void) __ksym;
> +struct task_struct *scx_bpf_remote_curr(s32 cpu) __ksym;
>  struct cgroup *scx_bpf_task_cgroup(struct task_struct *p) __ksym __weak;
>  u64 scx_bpf_now(void) __ksym __weak;
>  void scx_bpf_events(struct scx_event_stats *events, size_t events__sz) __ksym __weak;
> -- 
> 2.34.1
>