mirror of https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Hui Su <sh_def@163.com>
To: Andrea Righi <arighi@nvidia.com>
Cc: tj@kernel.org, void@manifault.com, changwoo@igalia.com,
	mingo@redhat.com, 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,
	sched-ext@lists.linux.dev, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
	bpf@vger.kernel.org, stable@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] sched_ext: idle: Respect task affinity in restricted CPU selection
Date: Mon, 12 Oct 2026 02:09:46 +0900	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <d4c69652718677b25a157eef31552bad@163.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <asufkdwCQvilJEqr@gpd4>

Hi Andrea,

> Sorry, I suggested this, but I just realized that we break
> SCX_PICK_IDLE_IN_NODE if we do this. What if we factor the check with
> an helper?

Good catch. You're right that deriving the candidate from task state also
needs to preserve the SCX_PICK_IDLE_IN_NODE constraint.

I'll factor the restricted path into a helper along the lines you
suggested, with the candidate derived from task state first, followed by
the task-affinity, caller-mask, and node checks before consuming the idle
bit.

I'll also add focused validation for the cross-node case and send a v3.

I'll keep SCX_PICK_IDLE_CORE handling as a separate follow-up rather than
mixing it into this fix.

Thanks,
Hui


      reply	other threads:[~2026-10-11 17:11 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 6+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2026-10-11  2:52 [PATCH] " Hui Su
2026-10-11  7:02 ` Andrea Righi
2026-10-11  9:10   ` Hui Su
2026-10-11 13:17   ` [PATCH v2] " Hui Su
2026-10-11 14:39     ` Andrea Righi
2026-10-11 17:09       ` Hui Su [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=d4c69652718677b25a157eef31552bad@163.com \
    --to=sh_def@163.com \
    --cc=arighi@nvidia.com \
    --cc=bpf@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=bsegall@google.com \
    --cc=changwoo@igalia.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@redhat.com \
    --cc=peterz@infradead.org \
    --cc=rostedt@goodmis.org \
    --cc=sched-ext@lists.linux.dev \
    --cc=stable@vger.kernel.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
all inboxes | Powered by JetHome®