mirror of https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: liuwenfang <liuwenfang@honor.com>
To: 'Tejun Heo' <tj@kernel.org>
Cc: 'David Vernet' <void@manifault.com>,
	'Andrea Righi' <arighi@nvidia.com>,
	'Changwoo Min' <changwoo@igalia.com>,
	'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>,
	"'linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org'" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: [PATCH v4 1/3] sched_ext: Fix pnt_seq calculation when picking the next task
Date: Tue, 19 Aug 2025 06:52:03 +0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <228ebd9e6ed3437996dffe15735a9caa@honor.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <814bebd2ad844b08993836fd8e7274b8@honor.com>

Now as the rq->scx.pnt_seq is only incremented when the target CPU
switches from one SCX task to one non-SCX task, the pair CPU would
not exit the busy-wait state reasonably in scx_pair.

In scx_pair, rq->scx.pnt_seq is introduced to improve exclusion
guarantees. The invoking CPU calls scx_bpf_kick_cpu() with
SCX_KICK_WAIT and enters the busy-wait state. It should exit this
state once the target CPU has entered the rescheduling path with
rq->scx.pnt_seq incremented.

So, pnt_seq calculation is moved to put_prev_set_next_task(), it
will be incremented for any task switches on the target CPU, then
the invoking CPU can exit the busy-wait state properly.

Signed-off-by: Wenfang Liu liuwenfang@honor.com
---
 kernel/sched/ext.c   | 10 +---------
 kernel/sched/fair.c  |  2 +-
 kernel/sched/sched.h | 30 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-
 3 files changed, 31 insertions(+), 11 deletions(-)

diff --git a/kernel/sched/ext.c b/kernel/sched/ext.c
index f5133249f..ba99739d7 100644
--- a/kernel/sched/ext.c
+++ b/kernel/sched/ext.c
@@ -3191,14 +3191,6 @@ static void switch_class(struct rq *rq, struct task_struct *next)
 {
 	const struct sched_class *next_class = next->sched_class;
 
-#ifdef CONFIG_SMP
-	/*
-	 * Pairs with the smp_load_acquire() issued by a CPU in
-	 * kick_cpus_irq_workfn() who is waiting for this CPU to perform a
-	 * resched.
-	 */
-	smp_store_release(&rq->scx.pnt_seq, rq->scx.pnt_seq + 1);
-#endif
 	if (!static_branch_unlikely(&scx_ops_cpu_preempt))
 		return;
 
@@ -5966,7 +5958,7 @@ static void kick_cpus_irq_workfn(struct irq_work *irq_work)
 		if (cpu != cpu_of(this_rq)) {
 			/*
 			 * Pairs with smp_store_release() issued by this CPU in
-			 * switch_class() on the resched path.
+			 * __put_prev_set_next_scx() on the resched path.
 			 *
 			 * We busy-wait here to guarantee that no other task can
 			 * be scheduled on our core before the target CPU has
diff --git a/kernel/sched/fair.c b/kernel/sched/fair.c
index 0fb9bf995..21214b3fa 100644
--- a/kernel/sched/fair.c
+++ b/kernel/sched/fair.c
@@ -8885,7 +8885,7 @@ pick_next_task_fair(struct rq *rq, struct task_struct *prev, struct rq_flags *rf
 	if (prev->sched_class != &fair_sched_class)
 		goto simple;
 
-	__put_prev_set_next_dl_server(rq, prev, p);
+	__put_prev_set_next(rq, prev, p);
 
 	/*
 	 * Because of the set_next_buddy() in dequeue_task_fair() it is rather
diff --git a/kernel/sched/sched.h b/kernel/sched/sched.h
index 47972f34e..435de61c4 100644
--- a/kernel/sched/sched.h
+++ b/kernel/sched/sched.h
@@ -1738,12 +1738,32 @@ static inline void scx_rq_clock_invalidate(struct rq *rq)
 	WRITE_ONCE(rq->scx.flags, rq->scx.flags & ~SCX_RQ_CLK_VALID);
 }
 
+static inline void __put_prev_set_next_scx(struct rq *rq,
+					   struct task_struct *prev,
+					   struct task_struct *next)
+{
+	if (!scx_enabled())
+		return;
+
+#ifdef CONFIG_SMP
+	/*
+	 * Pairs with the smp_load_acquire() issued by a CPU in
+	 * kick_cpus_irq_workfn() who is waiting for this CPU to perform a
+	 * resched.
+	 */
+	smp_store_release(&rq->scx.pnt_seq, rq->scx.pnt_seq + 1);
+#endif
+}
+
 #else /* !CONFIG_SCHED_CLASS_EXT */
 #define scx_enabled()		false
 #define scx_switched_all()	false
 
 static inline void scx_rq_clock_update(struct rq *rq, u64 clock) {}
 static inline void scx_rq_clock_invalidate(struct rq *rq) {}
+static inline void __put_prev_set_next_scx(struct rq *rq,
+					   struct task_struct *prev,
+					   struct task_struct *next) {}
 #endif /* !CONFIG_SCHED_CLASS_EXT */
 
 /*
@@ -2457,13 +2477,21 @@ __put_prev_set_next_dl_server(struct rq *rq,
 	rq->dl_server = NULL;
 }
 
+static inline void __put_prev_set_next(struct rq *rq,
+				       struct task_struct *prev,
+				       struct task_struct *next)
+{
+	__put_prev_set_next_dl_server(rq, prev, next);
+	__put_prev_set_next_scx(rq, prev, next);
+}
+
 static inline void put_prev_set_next_task(struct rq *rq,
 					  struct task_struct *prev,
 					  struct task_struct *next)
 {
 	WARN_ON_ONCE(rq->curr != prev);
 
-	__put_prev_set_next_dl_server(rq, prev, next);
+	__put_prev_set_next(rq, prev, next);
 
 	if (next == prev)
 		return;
-- 
2.17.1

  parent reply	other threads:[~2025-08-19  6:52 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 29+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2025-06-21  4:09 [PATCH] sched_ext: Fix cpu_released while RT task and SCX task are scheduled concurrently liuwenfang
2025-06-23 19:50 ` 'Tejun Heo'
2025-06-28  6:50   ` [PATCH v2 1/2] " liuwenfang
2025-07-17 21:38     ` 'Tejun Heo'
2025-07-20  9:20       ` liuwenfang
2025-07-20  9:38         ` [PATCH v3 2/3] " liuwenfang
2025-08-12  1:26           ` 'Tejun Heo'
2025-07-20  9:41         ` [PATCH v3 3/3] sched_ext: Fix cpu_released while changing sched policy of the running task liuwenfang
2025-08-12  1:31           ` 'Tejun Heo'
2025-08-19  6:52           ` liuwenfang [this message]
2025-08-19  6:55             ` [PATCH v4 2/3] sched_ext: Fix cpu_released while RT task and SCX task are scheduled concurrently liuwenfang
2025-08-19  7:07               ` [PATCH v4 3/3] sched_ext: Fix cpu_released while changing sched policy of the running task liuwenfang
2025-08-19  7:47               ` [PATCH v4 2/3] sched_ext: Fix cpu_released while RT task and SCX task are scheduled concurrently Peter Zijlstra
2025-08-19  8:47                 ` 回复: " liuwenfang
2025-08-19 10:08                   ` Peter Zijlstra
2025-08-20  0:28                 ` 'Tejun Heo'
2025-08-20  9:18                   ` Peter Zijlstra
2025-08-20 16:52                     ` 'Tejun Heo'
2025-06-28  7:20   ` [PATCH v2 2/2] sched_ext: Fix cpu_released while changing sched policy of the running task liuwenfang
2025-07-17 21:48     ` 'Tejun Heo'
2025-07-18  9:06       ` liuwenfang
2025-07-20  9:36         ` [PATCH v3 1/3] sched_ext: Fix pnt_seq calculation liuwenfang
2025-08-12  0:03           ` 'Tejun Heo'
2025-08-12  0:30             ` 'Tejun Heo'
2025-08-18 10:45               ` liuwenfang
2025-08-18 17:43                 ` 'Tejun Heo'
2025-08-19  7:41                   ` liuwenfang
2025-08-18 17:47           ` Peter Zijlstra
2025-08-19  7:36             ` liuwenfang

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=228ebd9e6ed3437996dffe15735a9caa@honor.com \
    --to=liuwenfang@honor.com \
    --cc=arighi@nvidia.com \
    --cc=bsegall@google.com \
    --cc=changwoo@igalia.com \
    --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=tj@kernel.org \
    --cc=vincent.guittot@linaro.org \
    --cc=void@manifault.com \
    --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

Powered by JetHome