From: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
To: mingo@kernel.org
Cc: peterz@infradead.org, juri.lelli@redhat.com,
vincent.guittot@linaro.org, dietmar.eggemann@arm.com,
rostedt@goodmis.org, bsegall@google.com, mgorman@suse.de,
vschneid@redhat.com, kprateek.nayak@amd.com,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, tj@kernel.org,
ziqianlu@bytedance.com
Subject: [PATCH v2 05/12] sched/core: Abstract/fix rq_clock_start_loop_update()
Date: Sat, 07 Nov 2026 12:59:18 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20261107120207.242460109@infradead.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20261107115913.261163891@infradead.org>
The existing rq_clock_start_loop_update() / rq_lock_stop_loop_update() almost
do what we need rq_drop_lock() / rq_repin_lock() to do. They freeze time by
setting ACT_SKIP.
Rename them rq_clock_freeze() / rq_clock_thaw() and have them operate on a new
bit RQCF_FREEZE. This is such that schedule() can safely nest inside
rq_clock_freeze() as is required for rq_drop_lock().
Sanitize the rq->clock_update_flags handling while adding the new bit --
notably do away with the full shift left which makes a mess of things.
Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@infradead.org>
---
kernel/sched/core.c | 4 +--
kernel/sched/fair.c | 15 +++++++-----
kernel/sched/sched.h | 63 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++----------------------
3 files changed, 48 insertions(+), 34 deletions(-)
--- a/kernel/sched/core.c
+++ b/kernel/sched/core.c
@@ -7185,9 +7185,9 @@ static void __sched notrace __schedule(i
hrtick_schedule_enter(rq);
/* Promote REQ to ACT */
- rq->clock_update_flags <<= 1;
+ rq->clock_update_flags |= (rq->clock_update_flags & RQCF_REQ_SKIP) << 1;
update_rq_clock(rq);
- rq->clock_update_flags = RQCF_UPDATED;
+ rq->clock_update_flags &= (RQCF_FREEZE|RQCF_UPDATED);
switch_count = &prev->nivcsw;
--- a/kernel/sched/fair.c
+++ b/kernel/sched/fair.c
@@ -5445,6 +5445,7 @@ static inline void clear_tg_load_avg(str
static void __maybe_unused clear_tg_offline_cfs_rqs(struct rq *rq)
{
struct task_group *tg;
+ unsigned int cuf;
lockdep_assert_rq_held(rq);
@@ -5453,7 +5454,7 @@ static void __maybe_unused clear_tg_offl
* set_rq_offline(), so we should skip updating
* the rq clock again in unthrottle_cfs_rq().
*/
- rq_clock_start_loop_update(rq);
+ cuf = rq_clock_freeze(rq);
guard(rcu)();
@@ -5463,7 +5464,7 @@ static void __maybe_unused clear_tg_offl
clear_tg_load_avg(cfs_rq);
}
- rq_clock_stop_loop_update(rq);
+ rq_clock_thaw(rq, cuf);
}
/*
@@ -7331,6 +7332,7 @@ static void __cfsb_csd_unthrottle(void *
{
struct cfs_rq *cursor, *tmp;
struct rq *rq = arg;
+ unsigned int cuf;
guard(rq_lock)(rq);
@@ -7340,7 +7342,7 @@ static void __cfsb_csd_unthrottle(void *
* Do it once and skip the potential next ones.
*/
update_rq_clock(rq);
- rq_clock_start_loop_update(rq);
+ cuf = rq_clock_freeze(rq);
/*
* Since we hold rq lock we're safe from concurrent manipulation of
@@ -7359,7 +7361,7 @@ static void __cfsb_csd_unthrottle(void *
unthrottle_cfs_rq(cursor);
}
- rq_clock_stop_loop_update(rq);
+ rq_clock_thaw(rq, cuf);
}
static inline void __unthrottle_cfs_rq_async(struct cfs_rq *cfs_rq)
@@ -7865,6 +7867,7 @@ static void __maybe_unused update_runtim
static void __maybe_unused unthrottle_offline_cfs_rqs(struct rq *rq)
{
struct task_group *tg;
+ unsigned int cuf;
lockdep_assert_rq_held(rq);
@@ -7877,7 +7880,7 @@ static void __maybe_unused unthrottle_of
* set_rq_offline(), so we should skip updating
* the rq clock again in unthrottle_cfs_rq().
*/
- rq_clock_start_loop_update(rq);
+ cuf = rq_clock_freeze(rq);
guard(rcu)();
@@ -7904,7 +7907,7 @@ static void __maybe_unused unthrottle_of
unthrottle_cfs_rq(cfs_rq);
}
- rq_clock_stop_loop_update(rq);
+ rq_clock_thaw(rq, cuf);
}
bool cfs_task_bw_constrained(struct task_struct *p)
--- a/kernel/sched/sched.h
+++ b/kernel/sched/sched.h
@@ -1790,24 +1790,33 @@ extern void update_rq_clock(struct rq *r
* %RQCF_ACT_SKIP - is set from inside of __schedule() when skipping is
* in effect and calls to update_rq_clock() are being ignored.
*
+ * %RQCF_FREEZE - set from rq_clock_freeze(), much like ACT_SKIP it
+ * makes update_rq_clock() a noop.
+ *
* %RQCF_UPDATED - is a debug flag that indicates whether a call has been
* made to update_rq_clock() since the last time rq::lock was pinned.
*
- * If inside of __schedule(), clock_update_flags will have been
- * shifted left (a left shift is a cheap operation for the fast path
- * to promote %RQCF_REQ_SKIP to %RQCF_ACT_SKIP), so you must use,
- *
- * if (rq-clock_update_flags >= RQCF_UPDATED)
- *
- * to check if %RQCF_UPDATED is set. It'll never be shifted more than
- * one position though, because the next rq_unpin_lock() will shift it
- * back.
+ *
+ * yield():
+ * will generally result in REQ_SKIP.
+ *
+ * update_rq_clock():
+ * sets UPDATED, will not modify rq->clock when NOP_MASK
+ *
+ * schedule():
+ * will promote REQ_SKIP to ACT_SKIP before its update_rq_clock() to ensure
+ * the yield() and schedule() appear to happen instantaneous.
+ *
+ * rq_clock_freeze()/rq_clock_thaw():
+ * set FREEZE to make 'nested' update_rq_clock() calls NOP and avoid
+ * time being moved forward. Also used in rq_drop_lock()/rq_repin_lock().
*/
#define RQCF_REQ_SKIP 0x01
#define RQCF_ACT_SKIP 0x02
-#define RQCF_UPDATED 0x04
+#define RQCF_FREEZE 0x04
+#define RQCF_UPDATED 0x08
-#define RQCF_NOP_MASK (RQCF_ACT_SKIP | RQCF_UPDATED)
+#define RQCF_NOP_MASK (RQCF_ACT_SKIP | RQCF_FREEZE | RQCF_UPDATED)
static inline void assert_clock_updated(struct rq *rq)
{
@@ -1815,7 +1824,7 @@ static inline void assert_clock_updated(
* The only reason for not seeing a clock update since the
* last rq_pin_lock() is if we're currently skipping updates.
*/
- WARN_ON_ONCE(rq->clock_update_flags < RQCF_ACT_SKIP);
+ WARN_ON_ONCE(!(rq->clock_update_flags & RQCF_UPDATED));
}
static inline u64 rq_clock(struct rq *rq)
@@ -1851,25 +1860,27 @@ static inline void rq_clock_cancel_skipu
}
/*
- * During cpu offlining and rq wide unthrottling, we can trigger
- * an update_rq_clock() for several cfs and rt runqueues (Typically
- * when using list_for_each_entry_*)
- * rq_clock_start_loop_update() can be called after updating the clock
- * once and before iterating over the list to prevent multiple update.
- * After the iterative traversal, we need to call rq_clock_stop_loop_update()
- * to clear RQCF_ACT_SKIP of rq->clock_update_flags.
+ * FREEZE rq_clock. This is used in a number of places to
+ * ensure things appears to happen at the same time.
+ *
+ * Eg. during cpu offlining and rq wide unthrottling, we can trigger an
+ * update_rq_clock() for several cfs and rt runqueues (Typically when using
+ * list_for_each_entry_*)
*/
-static inline void rq_clock_start_loop_update(struct rq *rq)
+static inline unsigned int rq_clock_freeze(struct rq *rq)
{
+ unsigned int flags = rq->clock_update_flags;
lockdep_assert_rq_held(rq);
- WARN_ON_ONCE(rq->clock_update_flags & RQCF_ACT_SKIP);
- rq->clock_update_flags |= RQCF_ACT_SKIP;
+ assert_clock_updated(rq);
+ rq->clock_update_flags |= RQCF_FREEZE;
+ return flags;
}
-static inline void rq_clock_stop_loop_update(struct rq *rq)
+static inline void rq_clock_thaw(struct rq *rq, bool flags)
{
lockdep_assert_rq_held(rq);
- rq->clock_update_flags &= ~RQCF_ACT_SKIP;
+ rq->clock_update_flags &= ~RQCF_FREEZE;
+ rq->clock_update_flags |= RQCF_UPDATED | (flags & RQCF_FREEZE);
}
struct rq_flags {
@@ -1938,14 +1949,14 @@ static inline void rq_pin_lock(struct rq
{
rf->cookie = lockdep_pin_lock(__rq_lockp(rq));
- rq->clock_update_flags &= (RQCF_REQ_SKIP|RQCF_ACT_SKIP);
+ rq->clock_update_flags &= ~RQCF_UPDATED;
rf->clock_update_flags = 0;
assert_balance_callbacks_empty(rq);
}
static inline void rq_unpin_lock(struct rq *rq, struct rq_flags *rf)
{
- if (rq->clock_update_flags > RQCF_ACT_SKIP)
+ if (rq->clock_update_flags & RQCF_UPDATED)
rf->clock_update_flags = RQCF_UPDATED;
scx_rq_clock_invalidate(rq);
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2026-11-07 12:03 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 13+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2026-11-07 11:59 [PATCH v2 00/12] sched: core-sched fixes and balancing Peter Zijlstra
2026-11-07 11:59 ` [PATCH v2 01/12] sched/core: Fix pick_next_task() self recursion Peter Zijlstra
2026-11-07 11:59 ` [PATCH v2 02/12] sched/core: Introduce rq_drop_lock() Peter Zijlstra
2026-11-07 11:59 ` [PATCH v2 03/12] sched/core: Decompose update_rq_clock() Peter Zijlstra
2026-11-07 11:59 ` [PATCH v2 04/12] sched/core: Make __update_rq_clock() skip updates on UPDATED Peter Zijlstra
2026-11-07 11:59 ` Peter Zijlstra [this message]
2026-11-07 11:59 ` [PATCH v2 06/12] sched/core: New rq_{pin,drop,repin,unpin}_lock() semantics Peter Zijlstra
2026-11-07 11:59 ` [PATCH v2 07/12] sched/core: Simplify/fix time updates Peter Zijlstra
2026-11-07 11:59 ` [PATCH v2 08/12] sched/core: Allow newidle for core-sched Peter Zijlstra
2026-11-07 11:59 ` [PATCH v2 09/12] sched/rt: Add early exit on balance path Peter Zijlstra
2026-11-07 11:59 ` [PATCH v2 10/12] sched/fair: Reflow pick_task_fair() / newidle Peter Zijlstra
2026-11-07 11:59 ` [PATCH v2 11/12] sched/fair: Push sched_balance_newidle() unlock down Peter Zijlstra
2026-11-07 11:59 ` [PATCH v2 12/12] sched: Remove sched_class::balance() Peter Zijlstra
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=20261107120207.242460109@infradead.org \
--to=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=bsegall@google.com \
--cc=dietmar.eggemann@arm.com \
--cc=juri.lelli@redhat.com \
--cc=kprateek.nayak@amd.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mgorman@suse.de \
--cc=mingo@kernel.org \
--cc=rostedt@goodmis.org \
--cc=tj@kernel.org \
--cc=vincent.guittot@linaro.org \
--cc=vschneid@redhat.com \
--cc=ziqianlu@bytedance.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®