From: zhidao su <soolaugust@gmail.com>
To: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, sched-ext@lists.linux.dev
Cc: tj@kernel.org, void@manifault.com, arighi@nvidia.com,
changwoo@igalia.com, zhidao su <suzhidao@xiaomi.com>
Subject: [PATCH] sched_ext: Use READ_ONCE() for lock-free reads of module param variables
Date: Thu, 5 Mar 2026 12:06:33 +0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20260305040633.1274357-1-suzhidao@xiaomi.com> (raw)
bypass_lb_cpu() reads scx_bypass_lb_intv_us and scx_slice_bypass_us
without holding any lock, in timer callback context where module
parameter writes via sysfs can happen concurrently:
min_delta_us = scx_bypass_lb_intv_us / SCX_BYPASS_LB_MIN_DELTA_DIV;
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
plain read -- KCSAN data race
if (delta < DIV_ROUND_UP(min_delta_us, scx_slice_bypass_us))
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
plain read -- KCSAN data race
scx_bypass_lb_intv_us already uses READ_ONCE() in scx_bypass_lb_timerfn()
and scx_bypass() for its other lock-free read sites, leaving bypass_lb_cpu()
inconsistent. scx_slice_bypass_us has the same lock-free access pattern in
the same function.
Fix both plain reads by using READ_ONCE() to complete the concurrent
access annotation and make the code KCSAN-clean:
min_delta_us = READ_ONCE(scx_bypass_lb_intv_us) / SCX_BYPASS_LB_MIN_DELTA_DIV;
if (delta < DIV_ROUND_UP(min_delta_us, READ_ONCE(scx_slice_bypass_us)))
Signed-off-by: zhidao su <suzhidao@xiaomi.com>
---
kernel/sched/ext.c | 4 ++--
1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
diff --git a/kernel/sched/ext.c b/kernel/sched/ext.c
index 1c3170846c84..9a1471ad5ae7 100644
--- a/kernel/sched/ext.c
+++ b/kernel/sched/ext.c
@@ -4004,8 +4004,8 @@ static u32 bypass_lb_cpu(struct scx_sched *sch, struct rq *rq,
* consider offloading iff the total queued duration is over the
* threshold.
*/
- min_delta_us = scx_bypass_lb_intv_us / SCX_BYPASS_LB_MIN_DELTA_DIV;
- if (delta < DIV_ROUND_UP(min_delta_us, scx_slice_bypass_us))
+ min_delta_us = READ_ONCE(scx_bypass_lb_intv_us) / SCX_BYPASS_LB_MIN_DELTA_DIV;
+ if (delta < DIV_ROUND_UP(min_delta_us, READ_ONCE(scx_slice_bypass_us)))
return 0;
raw_spin_rq_lock_irq(rq);
--
2.43.0
next reply other threads:[~2026-03-05 4:06 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 3+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2026-03-05 4:06 zhidao su [this message]
2026-03-05 6:18 zhidao su
2026-03-05 16:20 ` Tejun Heo
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=20260305040633.1274357-1-suzhidao@xiaomi.com \
--to=soolaugust@gmail.com \
--cc=arighi@nvidia.com \
--cc=changwoo@igalia.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=sched-ext@lists.linux.dev \
--cc=suzhidao@xiaomi.com \
--cc=tj@kernel.org \
--cc=void@manifault.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®