mirror of https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: K Prateek Nayak <kprateek.nayak@amd.com>
To: "Shubhang Kaushik (Ampere)" <sh@gentwo.org>,
	Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>,
	Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>,
	Juri Lelli <juri.lelli@redhat.com>,
	Vincent Guittot <vincent.guittot@linaro.org>,
	Dietmar Eggemann <dietmar.eggemann@arm.com>,
	Steven Rostedt <rostedt@goodmis.org>,
	Ben Segall <bsegall@google.com>, Mel Gorman <mgorman@suse.de>,
	Valentin Schneider <vschneid@redhat.com>
Cc: Christoph Lameter <cl@gentwo.org>,
	Shubhang Kaushik <shubhang@os.amperecomputing.com>,
	<linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3] sched/core: Preserve wake flags across queued wakeups
Date: Wed, 22 Jul 2026 14:23:18 +0530	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <1bebcf2d-2325-4e11-bb5f-347a0ac10fcc@amd.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20260721-b4-sched-ttwu-wake-flags-v3-1-07b92122bf28@gentwo.org>

Hello Shubhang,

On 7/22/2026 12:24 PM, Shubhang Kaushik (Ampere) wrote:
> Queued wakeups currently save only whether the wakee migrated. When the
> target CPU drains the wakelist, sched_ttwu_pending() therefore passes only
> WF_MIGRATED or 0 to ttwu_do_activate().
> 
> That loses flags which are still used after CPU selection. For example,
> WF_RQ_SELECTED is set after select_task_rq() chooses a runqueue, then used
> by ttwu_do_activate() for ENQUEUE_RQ_SELECTED and by wakeup_preempt_fair()
> for the preemption threshold:
> 
> direct wakeup:
>        select_task_rq() -> WF_RQ_SELECTED
>        ttwu_do_activate(WF_RQ_SELECTED)
>        wakeup_preempt_fair(WF_RQ_SELECTED)
> 
> queued wakeup:
>        select_task_rq() -> WF_RQ_SELECTED
>        ttwu_queue_wakelist() -> save WF_MIGRATED only
>        sched_ttwu_pending() -> ttwu_do_activate(WF_MIGRATED or 0)
> 
> Preserve the wake flags that still matter after queueing: WF_TTWU,
> WF_SYNC, WF_MIGRATED and WF_RQ_SELECTED. Do not save WF_CURRENT_CPU,
> which is only a CPU-selection hint.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Shubhang Kaushik (Ampere) <sh@gentwo.org>
> ---
> Tested on an 80 CPU Ampere Altra system with perf bench sched messaging,
> perf bench sched pipe, hackbench and SPECjBB. No material regression was
> observed.
> 
> Baseline: mainline origin/master at v7.2-rc4 (248951ddc14d)
> ---
> Changes in v3:
>   - Use READ_ONCE()/WRITE_ONCE() for sched_remote_wakeup_flags.

Why? Adding to the llist will have release semantics and I don't think
there is any way for the receiver to see an object on the llist and it
not having "sched_remote_wakeup_flags" set properly.

Otherwise, a bunch of csd initialization bits would also need
READ_ONCE() / WRITE_ONCE() but I don't see any.

>   - Anchor the changelog on the WF_RQ_SELECTED preemption behavior.
>   - Keep the cross-CPU ordering comment for the task field.
> 
> Link to v2: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20260713-b4-sched-ttwu-wake-flags-v2-1-76e23a8cc313@gentwo.org
> 
> Changes in v2:
>   - Move sched_remote_wakeup_flags to a standalone u8 outside the scheduler
>     bitfields.
>   - Drop the unnecessary reset in sched_ttwu_pending().
>   - Add WF_TTWU_QUEUE_MASK for the wake flags preserved across the wakelist.
>   - Tighten the changelog around direct-vs-queued wakeup consistency.
> 
> Link to v1: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20260710-b4-sched-ttwu-wake-flags-v1-1-23182a4c5367@gentwo.org
> ---
>  include/linux/sched.h | 26 ++++++++++----------------
>  kernel/sched/core.c   | 10 ++++++++--
>  2 files changed, 18 insertions(+), 18 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/include/linux/sched.h b/include/linux/sched.h
> index 373bcc0598d10b4256a11f8c8373ece78fa5e0e5..c0de2ea02eeeb3ad9ca1a090260b00e1b35cbc39 100644
> --- a/include/linux/sched.h
> +++ b/include/linux/sched.h
> @@ -983,6 +983,16 @@ struct task_struct {
> 
>         /* Used for emulating ABI behavior of previous Linux versions: */
>         unsigned int                    personality;
> +       /*
> +        * Must not share the scheduler bitfield word because wakelist
> +        * queueing is not serialized by p->on_cpu.
> +        *
> +        * smp_load_acquire(&p->on_cpu) in ttwu_queue_wakelist() pairs

This should be "before" and not "in" here ^^

> +        * with smp_mb__after_spinlock() in schedule(), making current's

What? That load acquire pairs with smp_store_release() in finish_task()
before interrupts are enabled after context-switch on the destination
CPU.

> +        * stores visible before the target CPU uses these flags from
> +        * sched_ttwu_pending().
> +        */
> +       u8                              sched_remote_wakeup_flags;
> 
>         /* Scheduler bits, serialized by scheduler locks: */
>         unsigned                        sched_reset_on_fork:1;
> @@ -993,22 +1003,6 @@ struct task_struct {
>         /* Force alignment to the next boundary: */
>         unsigned                        :0;
> 
> -       /* Unserialized, strictly 'current' */
> -
> -       /*
> -        * This field must not be in the scheduler word above due to wakelist
> -        * queueing no longer being serialized by p->on_cpu. However:
> -        *
> -        * p->XXX = X;                  ttwu()
> -        * schedule()                     if (p->on_rq && ..) // false
> -        *   smp_mb__after_spinlock();    if (smp_load_acquire(&p->on_cpu) && //true
> -        *   deactivate_task()                ttwu_queue_wakelist())
> -        *     p->on_rq = 0;                    p->sched_remote_wakeup = Y;
> -        *
> -        * guarantees all stores of 'current' are visible before
> -        * ->sched_remote_wakeup gets used, so it can be in this word.
> -        */
> -       unsigned                        sched_remote_wakeup:1;
>  #ifdef CONFIG_RT_MUTEXES
>         unsigned                        sched_rt_mutex:1;
>  #endif
> diff --git a/kernel/sched/core.c b/kernel/sched/core.c
> index 96226707c2f6135341aa779b8262f113e103d8ad..7ddcc6a7f1c06675ce8084cd304475d61f869eb7 100644
> --- a/kernel/sched/core.c
> +++ b/kernel/sched/core.c
> @@ -3902,13 +3902,16 @@ void sched_ttwu_pending(void *arg)
>         update_rq_clock(rq);
> 
>         llist_for_each_entry_safe(p, t, llist, wake_entry.llist) {
> +               int wake_flags;

Do we really need that local variable?

> +
>                 if (WARN_ON_ONCE(p->on_cpu))
>                         smp_cond_load_acquire(&p->on_cpu, !VAL);
> 
>                 if (WARN_ON_ONCE(task_cpu(p) != cpu_of(rq)))
>                         set_task_cpu(p, cpu_of(rq));
> 
> -               ttwu_do_activate(rq, p, p->sched_remote_wakeup ? WF_MIGRATED : 0, &rf);
> +               wake_flags = READ_ONCE(p->sched_remote_wakeup_flags);
> +               ttwu_do_activate(rq, p, wake_flags, &rf);
>         }
> 
>         /*
> @@ -3947,11 +3950,14 @@ bool call_function_single_prep_ipi(int cpu)
>   * via sched_ttwu_wakeup() for activation so the wakee incurs the cost
>   * of the wakeup instead of the waker.
>   */
> +#define WF_TTWU_QUEUE_MASK     (WF_TTWU | WF_SYNC | WF_MIGRATED | \
> +                                WF_RQ_SELECTED)

I much rather prefer it in single line even though it crosses
80 characters. #defines like SCHED_DL_FLAGS run even longer.

>  static void __ttwu_queue_wakelist(struct task_struct *p, int cpu, int wake_flags)
>  {
>         struct rq *rq = cpu_rq(cpu);
> 
> -       p->sched_remote_wakeup = !!(wake_flags & WF_MIGRATED);
> +       WRITE_ONCE(p->sched_remote_wakeup_flags,
> +                  wake_flags & WF_TTWU_QUEUE_MASK);
> 
>         WRITE_ONCE(rq->ttwu_pending, 1);
>  #ifdef CONFIG_SMP

FWIW, feel free to include:

Tested-by: K Prateek Nayak <kprateek.nayak@amd.com>

-- 
Thanks and Regards,
Prateek


  reply	other threads:[~2026-07-22  8:53 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 3+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2026-07-22  6:54 Shubhang Kaushik (Ampere)
2026-07-22  8:53 ` K Prateek Nayak [this message]
2026-07-22 16:17   ` Shubhang

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=1bebcf2d-2325-4e11-bb5f-347a0ac10fcc@amd.com \
    --to=kprateek.nayak@amd.com \
    --cc=bsegall@google.com \
    --cc=cl@gentwo.org \
    --cc=dietmar.eggemann@arm.com \
    --cc=juri.lelli@redhat.com \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=mgorman@suse.de \
    --cc=mingo@redhat.com \
    --cc=peterz@infradead.org \
    --cc=rostedt@goodmis.org \
    --cc=sh@gentwo.org \
    --cc=shubhang@os.amperecomputing.com \
    --cc=vincent.guittot@linaro.org \
    --cc=vschneid@redhat.com \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox

all inboxes | Powered by JetHome®