From: Andrea Righi <arighi@nvidia.com>
To: Tejun Heo <tj@kernel.org>
Cc: David Vernet <void@manifault.com>,
Changwoo Min <changwoo@igalia.com>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/4 sched_ext/for-6.16] sched_ext: Clean up scx_root usages
Date: Wed, 14 May 2025 16:26:48 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <aCSoKBu0l-vTlScT@gpd3> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <aCSlvpiraPTKUqOf@mtj.duckdns.org>
On Wed, May 14, 2025 at 10:16:30AM -0400, Tejun Heo wrote:
> Hello, Andrea.
>
> On Wed, May 14, 2025 at 11:33:05AM +0200, Andrea Righi wrote:
> ...
> > > static void enqueue_task_scx(struct rq *rq, struct task_struct *p, int enq_flags)
> > > {
> > > + struct scx_sched *sch = scx_root;
> >
> > Do we need to use rcu_dereference(scx_root) here, as well as in all the
> > occurrences above where scx_root is dereferenced?
>
> So, if a task knows that it's attached to a scheduler instance, it knows
> that the scheduler pointer can be dereferenced safely. In case of the root
> scheduler, as long as any task is on SCX, naked derferences of scx_root are
> safe. Also, if there are multiple scheduler instances, we wouldn't want to
> use the root scheduler but rather the scheudler that's serving this task.
>
> So, currently, the code base is in a transitional state and I'm using naked
> scx_root dereferences basically as markers for necessary future
> substitutions. All naked references should be safe but they aren't great in
> that they'd trigger e.g. sparse warnings and generally don't look right.
> I'll add a comment on top of scx_root to clarify what's going on.
Makes sense, thanks for clarifying this. With a comment on top scx_root:
Reviewed-by: Andrea Righi <arighi@nvidia.com>
Thanks,
-Andrea
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2025-05-14 14:27 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 11+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2025-05-14 4:47 [PATCH 1/4 sched_ext/for-6.16] sched_ext: Clean up scx_root usages Tejun Heo
2025-05-14 4:48 ` [PATCH 2/4 sched_ext/for-6.16] sched_ext: Add @sch to SCX_CALL_OP*() Tejun Heo
2025-05-14 4:49 ` [PATCH 3/4 sched_ext/for-6.16] sched_ext: Cleanup [__]scx_exit/error*() Tejun Heo
2025-05-14 4:50 ` [PATCH 4/4 sched_ext/for-6.16] sched_ext: Add @sch to SCX_CALL_OP*() Tejun Heo
2025-05-14 9:33 ` [PATCH 1/4 sched_ext/for-6.16] sched_ext: Clean up scx_root usages Andrea Righi
2025-05-14 14:16 ` Tejun Heo
2025-05-14 14:26 ` Andrea Righi [this message]
2025-05-14 15:10 ` [PATCH sched_ext/for-6.16] sched_ext: Explain the temporary situation around scx_root dereferences Tejun Heo
2025-05-14 16:06 ` Andrea Righi
2025-05-14 16:38 ` Tejun Heo
2025-05-14 15:11 ` [PATCH 1/4 sched_ext/for-6.16] sched_ext: Clean up scx_root usages Tejun Heo
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=aCSoKBu0l-vTlScT@gpd3 \
--to=arighi@nvidia.com \
--cc=changwoo@igalia.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--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 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.