From: sashiko-bot@kernel.org
To: "Tejun Heo" <tj@kernel.org>
Cc: sched-ext@lists.linux.dev
Subject: Re: [PATCH 09/12] sched_ext: Eject the top rescue consumer on overload
Date: Sat, 01 Aug 2026 09:11:14 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20260801091115.750DC1F00AC4@smtp.kernel.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20260801085150.2697653-10-tj@kernel.org>
Thank you for your contribution! Sashiko AI review found 1 potential issue(s) to consider:
- [Medium] The `time_before()` check in `scx_rescue_check_overload()` suffers from a 32-bit jiffies wraparound vulnerability, disabling rescue overload protection for 24.8-day intervals on systems with 32-bit `unsigned long`.
--
--- Patch [9]: [PATCH 09/12] sched_ext: Eject the top rescue consumer on overload ---
commit 50e2ffc187a8450dacf680dcf11b98c2167b7621
Author: Tejun Heo <tj@kernel.org>
sched_ext: Eject the top rescue consumer on overload
This patch tracks each scheduler's recent rescue consumption per CPU as a
decaying average. If the oldest waiter on a CPU's rescue DSQ waits past a
configured threshold, the sub-scheduler with the highest recent consumption
is ejected. This prevents the generic stall watchdog from unfairly blaming
the waiting task's owner instead of the misbehaving party.
> diff --git a/kernel/sched/ext/sub.c b/kernel/sched/ext/sub.c
> index 3c1f11268e7f3..fdbe1c1bfaa8d 100644
> --- a/kernel/sched/ext/sub.c
> +++ b/kernel/sched/ext/sub.c
[ ... ]
> @@ -434,6 +459,63 @@ static bool scx_rescue_try_admit(struct rq *rq, struct task_struct *p)
> return false;
> }
>
> +/**
> + * scx_rescue_check_overload - Eject the top rescue consumer on a stuck rescue
> + * @rq: rq whose rescue timer fired
> + *
> + * If the oldest waiter on @rq's rescue DSQ has been queued for too long, rescue
> + * demand on this cpu persistently exceeds the configured bandwidth. Eject the
> + * sub with the highest recent rescue consumption instead of letting the
> + * scheduler stall path blame the waiter's owner, who may just be crowded out.
> + */
> +static void scx_rescue_check_overload(struct rq *rq)
> +{
> + struct scx_sched *victim = NULL, *pos;
> + struct task_struct *p;
> + int cpu = cpu_of(rq);
> + u64 max_avg = 0;
> + u32 dur_ms;
> +
> + lockdep_assert_rq_held(rq);
> +
> + p = list_first_entry_or_null(&rq->scx.rescue.dsq.list, struct task_struct,
> + scx.dsq_list.node);
> + if (!p)
> + return;
> +
> + /* has the head waiter been queued for longer than the threshold? */
> + if (time_before(jiffies, p->scx.rescue_at + scx_rescue_overload_after))
> + return;
> +
> + /*
> + * Grace period after the last ejection on this cpu - the freed
> + * bandwidth gets one threshold's worth of time to drain the backlog
> + * before another sub is judged.
> + */
> + if (time_before(jiffies, rq->scx.rescue.kill_at + scx_rescue_overload_after))
> + return;
[Severity: Medium]
Does this time_before() check have an issue with jiffies wraparound on 32-bit
systems?
If no rescue ejection occurs for LONG_MAX jiffies (about 24.8 days at HZ=1000
on 32-bit systems), jiffies - rq->scx.rescue.kill_at will exceed LONG_MAX.
Because the time_before() macro uses signed arithmetic, the difference wraps
around to a negative value.
This causes time_before() to incorrectly evaluate to true, falsely trapping
the CPU in a continuous grace period. Would this disable overload ejections
for the next 24.8 days and cause the scheduler to fall back to the generic
stall watchdog instead?
--
Sashiko AI review · https://sashiko.dev/#/patchset/20260801085150.2697653-1-tj@kernel.org?part=9
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2026-08-01 9:11 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 17+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2026-08-01 8:51 [PATCHSET sched_ext/for-7.3] sched_ext: Bandwidth-limited rescue execution for stranded tasks Tejun Heo
2026-08-01 8:51 ` [PATCH 01/12] sched_ext: Rename scx_local_or_reject_dsq() to scx_resolve_local_dsq() Tejun Heo
2026-08-01 8:51 ` [PATCH 02/12] sched_ext: Make several ext.c helpers available outside ext.c Tejun Heo
2026-08-01 8:58 ` sashiko-bot
2026-08-01 8:51 ` [PATCH 03/12] sched_ext: Factor out __scx_bpf_now() Tejun Heo
2026-08-01 8:51 ` [PATCH 04/12] sched_ext: Reject internal enq_flags in the dsq move kfuncs Tejun Heo
2026-08-01 8:51 ` [PATCH 05/12] sched_ext: Make SCX_ENQ_IGNORE_CAPS waive the preemption cap too Tejun Heo
2026-08-01 8:51 ` [PATCH 06/12] sched_ext: Synchronize slice and dsq_vtime writes Tejun Heo
2026-08-01 8:51 ` [PATCH 07/12] sched_ext: Add SCX_TASK_PROTECTED Tejun Heo
2026-08-01 8:51 ` [PATCH 08/12] sched_ext: Add bandwidth-limited rescue execution for stranded tasks Tejun Heo
2026-08-01 8:51 ` [PATCH 09/12] sched_ext: Eject the top rescue consumer on overload Tejun Heo
2026-08-01 9:11 ` sashiko-bot [this message]
2026-08-01 8:51 ` [PATCH 10/12] sched_ext: Sync tools autogen enum headers Tejun Heo
2026-08-01 8:51 ` [PATCH 11/12] sched_ext: scx_qmap - Idle-check pinned tasks before direct dispatch Tejun Heo
2026-08-01 9:06 ` sashiko-bot
2026-08-01 8:51 ` [PATCH 12/12] sched_ext: scx_qmap - Add rescue support Tejun Heo
2026-08-01 9:06 ` sashiko-bot
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=20260801091115.750DC1F00AC4@smtp.kernel.org \
--to=sashiko-bot@kernel.org \
--cc=sashiko-reviews@lists.linux.dev \
--cc=sched-ext@lists.linux.dev \
--cc=tj@kernel.org \
/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 an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.