From: 'Tejun Heo' <tj@kernel.org>
To: liuwenfang <liuwenfang@honor.com>
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: Re: [PATCH v3 3/3] sched_ext: Fix cpu_released while changing sched policy of the running task
Date: Mon, 11 Aug 2025 15:31:54 -1000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <aJqZihOivRztpRtP@slm.duckdns.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <814bebd2ad844b08993836fd8e7274b8@honor.com>
On Sun, Jul 20, 2025 at 09:41:03AM +0000, liuwenfang wrote:
> Priority inheritance policy should be cared, eg., one SCX task can be
> boosted to REAL-TIME while holding a mutex lock, and then restored while
> releasing the lock. The value cpu_released is fixed when changing the
> sched class of the running task.
>
> Signed-off-by: Wenfang Liu liuwenfang@honor.com
> ---
> kernel/sched/ext.c | 21 ++++++++++++++++++++-
> 1 file changed, 20 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
>
> diff --git a/kernel/sched/ext.c b/kernel/sched/ext.c
> index ddf4bd060..e3b9032e2 100644
> --- a/kernel/sched/ext.c
> +++ b/kernel/sched/ext.c
> @@ -3899,11 +3899,30 @@ static void switching_to_scx(struct rq *rq, struct task_struct *p)
>
> static void switched_from_scx(struct rq *rq, struct task_struct *p)
> {
> + if (task_current(rq, p))
> + switch_class(rq, p);
switch_class() should probably be named to something more specific - e.g.
maybe_cpu_release()?
> scx_ops_disable_task(p);
> }
>
> static void wakeup_preempt_scx(struct rq *rq, struct task_struct *p,int wake_flags) {}
> -static void switched_to_scx(struct rq *rq, struct task_struct *p) {}
> +static void switched_to_scx(struct rq *rq, struct task_struct *p)
> +{
> + lockdep_assert_rq_held(rq);
> +
> + if (static_branch_unlikely(&scx_ops_cpu_preempt) &&
> + unlikely(rq->scx.cpu_released) && task_current(rq, p)) {
> + /*
> + * If the previous sched_class for the current CPU was not SCX,
> + * notify the BPF scheduler that it again has control of the
> + * core. This callback complements ->cpu_release(), which is
> + * emitted in switch_class().
> + */
> + if (SCX_HAS_OP(cpu_acquire))
> + SCX_CALL_OP(SCX_KF_REST, cpu_acquire, rq, cpu_of(rq), NULL);
> + rq->scx.cpu_released = false;
> + }
> +}
and most of this can be factored into e.g. maybe_cpu_acquire() so that the
same code is not duplicated between here and balance_one()?
Also, please target the for-6.17-fixes branch of the sched_ext tree.
git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/tj/sched_ext.git for-6.17-fixes
Thank you.
--
tejun
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2025-08-12 1:31 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' [this message]
2025-08-19 6:52 ` [PATCH v4 1/3] sched_ext: Fix pnt_seq calculation when picking the next task liuwenfang
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=aJqZihOivRztpRtP@slm.duckdns.org \
--to=tj@kernel.org \
--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=liuwenfang@honor.com \
--cc=mgorman@suse.de \
--cc=mingo@redhat.com \
--cc=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=rostedt@goodmis.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
all inboxes | Powered by JetHome®