From: Andrea Righi <arighi@nvidia.com>
To: Tejun Heo <tj@kernel.org>
Cc: David Vernet <void@manifault.com>,
Changwoo Min <changwoo@igalia.com>,
Emil Tsalapatis <emil@etsalapatis.com>,
Qiurong Fang <fangqiurong@kylinos.cn>,
sched-ext@lists.linux.dev, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH sched_ext/for-7.3-fixes] sched_ext: Wait for SCX_OPSS_DISPATCHING before reenqueueing a task
Date: Tue, 15 Sep 2026 22:54:32 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <aqmwiJ1StVe1EH4L@gpd4> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <a4304b3f0c89fba23f1e5e92997a8f56@kernel.org>
Hi Tejun,
On Tue, Sep 15, 2026 at 10:03:37AM -1000, Tejun Heo wrote:
> ebf1ccff79c4 ("sched_ext: Fix ops.dequeue() semantics") moved the final
> ops_state store in scx_dispatch_enqueue() after the DSQ unlock so that the
> custody update and ops.dequeue() precede it. A task can thus be found on a
> DSQ while still SCX_OPSS_DISPATCHING.
>
> The dequeue and core-sched pick paths wait for the state to clear in
> ops_dequeue() but the reenqueue paths don't. A reenqueue in that window runs
> ops.enqueue() and sets SCX_OPSS_QUEUED before the dispatch has completed.
> The dispatcher's final store then overwrites it with SCX_OPSS_NONE and
> finish_dispatch() drops every later dispatch of the task.
>
> Wait for SCX_OPSS_DISPATCHING to clear before dequeueing a task for
> reenqueue, the same way ops_dequeue() does.
>
> Fixes: ebf1ccff79c4 ("sched_ext: Fix ops.dequeue() semantics")
> Cc: stable@vger.kernel.org # v7.1+
> Signed-off-by: Tejun Heo <tj@kernel.org>
Thanks for fixing this, it makes sense to me.
Reviewed-by: Andrea Righi <arighi@nvidia.com>
-Andrea
> ---
> kernel/sched/ext/ext.c | 13 +++++++++++++
> kernel/sched/ext/internal.h | 1 +
> kernel/sched/ext/sub.c | 1 +
> 3 files changed, 15 insertions(+)
>
> --- a/kernel/sched/ext/ext.c
> +++ b/kernel/sched/ext/ext.c
> @@ -4404,6 +4404,17 @@ static bool local_task_should_reenq(stru
> return *reenq_flags & SCX_REENQ_ANY;
> }
>
> +/*
> + * The dispatcher stores the final ops_state after dropping the DSQ lock, so @p
> + * can be found on a DSQ while still %SCX_OPSS_DISPATCHING. Reenqueueing @p
> + * before that store lands would have it clobber the new %SCX_OPSS_QUEUED.
> + */
> +void scx_reenq_wait_dispatching(struct task_struct *p)
> +{
> + if (unlikely(atomic_long_read_acquire(&p->scx.ops_state) == SCX_OPSS_DISPATCHING))
> + wait_ops_state(p, SCX_OPSS_DISPATCHING);
> +}
> +
> static u32 reenq_local(struct scx_sched *sch, struct rq *rq, u64 reenq_flags)
> {
> LIST_HEAD(tasks);
> @@ -4447,6 +4458,7 @@ static u32 reenq_local(struct scx_sched
> if (!local_task_should_reenq(rq, p, &reenq_flags, &reason))
> continue;
>
> + scx_reenq_wait_dispatching(p);
> scx_dispatch_dequeue(rq, p);
>
> if (WARN_ON_ONCE(p->scx.flags & SCX_TASK_REENQ_REASON_MASK))
> @@ -4570,6 +4582,7 @@ static void reenq_user(struct rq *rq, st
> }
>
> /* @p is on @dsq, its rq and @dsq are locked */
> + scx_reenq_wait_dispatching(p);
> dispatch_dequeue_locked(p, dsq);
> raw_spin_unlock(&dsq->lock);
>
> --- a/kernel/sched/ext/internal.h
> +++ b/kernel/sched/ext/internal.h
> @@ -2078,6 +2078,7 @@ void scx_kick_cpu(struct scx_sched *sch,
> u64 __scx_bpf_now(struct rq *rq);
> void schedule_dsq_reenq(struct scx_sched *sch, struct scx_dispatch_q *dsq,
> u64 reenq_flags, struct rq *locked_rq);
> +void scx_reenq_wait_dispatching(struct task_struct *p);
> int __scx_init_task(struct scx_sched *sch, struct task_struct *p,
> struct cgroup *cgrp, bool fork);
> void scx_enable_task(struct scx_sched *sch, struct task_struct *p);
> --- a/kernel/sched/ext/sub.c
> +++ b/kernel/sched/ext/sub.c
> @@ -801,6 +801,7 @@ void scx_reenq_reject(struct rq *rq)
> if (WARN_ON_ONCE(p->migration_pending))
> continue;
>
> + scx_reenq_wait_dispatching(p);
> scx_dispatch_dequeue(rq, p);
>
> if (WARN_ON_ONCE(p->scx.flags & SCX_TASK_REENQ_REASON_MASK))
prev parent reply other threads:[~2026-09-15 20:54 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 2+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2026-09-15 20:03 Tejun Heo
2026-09-15 20:54 ` Andrea Righi [this message]
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=aqmwiJ1StVe1EH4L@gpd4 \
--to=arighi@nvidia.com \
--cc=changwoo@igalia.com \
--cc=emil@etsalapatis.com \
--cc=fangqiurong@kylinos.cn \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.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®