From: Tejun Heo <tj@kernel.org>
To: Andrea Righi <arighi@nvidia.com>
Cc: David Vernet <void@manifault.com>,
Changwoo Min <changwoo@igalia.com>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] sched_ext: Track currently locked rq
Date: Sat, 19 Apr 2025 07:34:16 -1000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <aAPemAFUsJaF_C2X@slm.duckdns.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20250419123536.154469-2-arighi@nvidia.com>
Hello, Andrea.
On Sat, Apr 19, 2025 at 02:24:30PM +0200, Andrea Righi wrote:
> @@ -149,6 +149,7 @@ struct sched_ext_entity {
> s32 selected_cpu;
> u32 kf_mask; /* see scx_kf_mask above */
> struct task_struct *kf_tasks[2]; /* see SCX_CALL_OP_TASK() */
> + struct rq *locked_rq; /* currently locked rq */
Can this be a percpu variable? While rq is locked, current can't switch out
anyway and that way we don't have to increase the size of task. Note that
kf_tasks[] are different in that some ops may, at least theoretically,
sleep.
> +static inline void update_locked_rq(struct rq *rq)
> +{
> + /*
> + * Check whether @rq is actually locked. This can help expose bugs
> + * or incorrect assumptions about the context in which a kfunc or
> + * callback is executed.
> + */
> + if (rq)
> + lockdep_assert_rq_held(rq);
> + current->scx.locked_rq = rq;
> + barrier();
As these conditions are program-order checks on the local CPU, I don't think
any barrier is necessary.
Thanks.
--
tejun
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2025-04-19 17:34 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 18+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2025-04-19 12:24 [PATCH 0/2] sched_ext: Introduce rq lock tracking Andrea Righi
2025-04-19 12:24 ` [PATCH 1/2] sched_ext: Track currently locked rq Andrea Righi
2025-04-19 17:34 ` Tejun Heo [this message]
2025-04-19 20:10 ` Andrea Righi
2025-04-19 20:30 ` Andrea Righi
2025-04-19 21:27 ` Andrea Righi
2025-04-20 17:44 ` Tejun Heo
2025-04-20 18:34 ` Andrea Righi
2025-04-19 12:24 ` [PATCH 2/2] sched_ext: Fix missing rq lock in scx_bpf_cpuperf_set() Andrea Righi
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2025-04-20 19:30 [PATCH v2 0/2] sched_ext: Introduce rq lock tracking Andrea Righi
2025-04-20 19:30 ` [PATCH 1/2] sched_ext: Track currently locked rq Andrea Righi
2025-04-21 19:03 ` Tejun Heo
2025-04-22 6:27 ` Andrea Righi
2025-04-22 8:26 [PATCH v3 0/2] sched_ext: Introduce rq lock tracking Andrea Righi
2025-04-22 8:26 ` [PATCH 1/2] sched_ext: Track currently locked rq Andrea Righi
2025-07-15 9:13 ` Breno Leitao
2025-07-15 17:20 ` Andrea Righi
2025-07-16 10:47 ` Breno Leitao
2025-07-16 12:40 ` Andrea Righi
2025-07-16 12:43 ` Breno Leitao
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=aAPemAFUsJaF_C2X@slm.duckdns.org \
--to=tj@kernel.org \
--cc=arighi@nvidia.com \
--cc=changwoo@igalia.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.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 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.