mirror of https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Andrea Righi <arighi@nvidia.com>
To: Christian Loehle <christian.loehle@arm.com>
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, sched-ext@lists.linux.dev,
	tj@kernel.org, void@manifault.com, mingo@redhat.com,
	peterz@infradead.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/3] sched_ext: Provide scx_bpf_remote_curr()
Date: Fri, 1 Aug 2025 16:47:15 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <aIzTcxGC6_5Ntm18@gpd4> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20250801141741.355059-3-christian.loehle@arm.com>

On Fri, Aug 01, 2025 at 03:17:40PM +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
> or acquiring any.
> 
> 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@arm.com>
> ---
>  kernel/sched/ext.c                       | 15 +++++++++++++++
>  tools/sched_ext/include/scx/common.bpf.h |  1 +
>  2 files changed, 16 insertions(+)
> 
> diff --git a/kernel/sched/ext.c b/kernel/sched/ext.c
> index b734f55f3318..92e66bb0b5f2 100644
> --- a/kernel/sched/ext.c
> +++ b/kernel/sched/ext.c
> @@ -7436,6 +7436,20 @@ __bpf_kfunc struct rq *scx_bpf_cpu_rq(s32 cpu)
>  	return cpu_rq(cpu);
>  }
>  
> +/**
> + * scx_bpf_remote_curr - Fetch the curr of a rq without acquiring its rq lock
> + * @cpu: CPU of the rq
> + *
> + * Neither a rq lock nor a task reference is acquired.
> + */
> +__bpf_kfunc struct task_struct *scx_bpf_remote_curr(s32 cpu)
> +{
> +	if (!kf_cpu_valid(cpu, NULL))
> +		return NULL;
> +
> +	return cpu_rq(cpu)->curr;
> +}

As mentioned in my previou comment, this should be something like:

 if (!kf_cpu_valid(cpu, NULL))
 	return NULL;

 rcu_read_lock();
 p = cpu_rq(cpu)->curr;
 if (p)
 	p = bpf_task_acquire(p);
 rcu_read_unlock();

 return p;

We may still race with CPU hotplugging, but I think it's not always
possible to use cpus_read_lock/unlock() here. Also, most of the scx
schedulers are restarted on CPU hotplugging events, so... one thing at a
time. :)

> +
>  /**
>   * scx_bpf_task_cgroup - Return the sched cgroup of a task
>   * @p: task of interest
> @@ -7600,6 +7614,7 @@ BTF_ID_FLAGS(func, scx_bpf_put_cpumask, KF_RELEASE)
>  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, KF_RET_NULL)
> +BTF_ID_FLAGS(func, scx_bpf_remote_curr, KF_RET_NULL)
>  #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 d4e21558e982..e5d4ef124532 100644
> --- a/tools/sched_ext/include/scx/common.bpf.h
> +++ b/tools/sched_ext/include/scx/common.bpf.h
> @@ -91,6 +91,7 @@ s32 scx_bpf_pick_any_cpu(const cpumask_t *cpus_allowed, u64 flags) __ksym;
>  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 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
> 

-Andrea

  reply	other threads:[~2025-08-01 14:47 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 9+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2025-08-01 14:17 [PATCH 0/3] sched_ext: Harden scx_bpf_cpu_rq() Christian Loehle
2025-08-01 14:17 ` [PATCH 1/3] sched_ext: Mark scx_bpf_cpu_rq as NULL returnable Christian Loehle
2025-08-01 14:17 ` [PATCH 2/3] sched_ext: Provide scx_bpf_remote_curr() Christian Loehle
2025-08-01 14:47   ` Andrea Righi [this message]
2025-08-01 14:58     ` Christian Loehle
2025-08-01 14:17 ` [PATCH 3/3] sched_ext: Guarantee rq lock on scx_bpf_cpu_rq() Christian Loehle
2025-08-01 14:51   ` Andrea Righi
2025-08-01 14:54     ` Christian Loehle
2025-08-01 14:39 ` [PATCH 0/3] sched_ext: Harden scx_bpf_cpu_rq() Andrea Righi

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=aIzTcxGC6_5Ntm18@gpd4 \
    --to=arighi@nvidia.com \
    --cc=christian.loehle@arm.com \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=mingo@redhat.com \
    --cc=peterz@infradead.org \
    --cc=sched-ext@lists.linux.dev \
    --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®