From: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
To: Changwoo Min <multics69@gmail.com>
Cc: tj@kernel.org, void@manifault.com, mingo@redhat.com,
changwoo@igalia.com, kernel-dev@igalia.com,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 4/6] sched_ext: Implement scx_bpf_now_ns()
Date: Wed, 11 Dec 2024 10:32:56 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20241211093256.GY35539@noisy.programming.kicks-ass.net> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20241209061531.257531-5-changwoo@igalia.com>
On Mon, Dec 09, 2024 at 03:15:29PM +0900, Changwoo Min wrote:
> +__bpf_kfunc u64 scx_bpf_now_ns(void)
> +{
> + struct rq *rq;
> + u64 clock;
> +
> + preempt_disable();
> +
> + /*
> + * If the rq clock is valid, use the cached rq clock
> + * whenever the clock does not go backward.
> + */
> + rq = this_rq();
> + clock = rq->scx.clock;
> +
> + if (!(rq->scx.flags & SCX_RQ_CLK_VALID) ||
> + (rq->scx.prev_clock >= clock)) {
As TJ said, it's best to consider that the clock can wrap.
> + /*
> + * If the rq clock is invalid or goes backward,
> + * start a new rq clock period with a fresh sched_clock_cpu().
> + *
> + * The cached rq clock can go backward because there is a
> + * race with a timer interrupt. Suppose that a timer interrupt
> + * occurred while running scx_bpf_now_ns() *after* reading the
> + * rq clock and *before* comparing the if condition. The timer
> + * interrupt will eventually call a BPF scheduler's ops.tick(),
> + * and the BPF scheduler can call scx_bpf_now_ns(). Since the
> + * scheduler core updates the rq clock before calling
> + * ops.tick(), the scx_bpf_now_ns() call will get the fresh
> + * clock. After handling the timer interrupt, the interrupted
> + * scx_bpf_now_ns() will be resumed, so the if condition will
> + * be compared. In this case, the clock, which was read before
> + * the timer interrupt, will be the same as rq->scx.prev_clock.
> + * When such a case is detected, start a new rq clock period
> + * with a fresh sched_clock_cpu().
This has a wall-of-text problem; use paragraphs?
> + */
> + clock = sched_clock_cpu(cpu_of(rq));
> + scx_rq_clock_update(rq, clock);
Doesn't this set the VALID bit again? How is using this outside of
RQ-lock and setting VALID a good idea?
> + }
> +
> + preempt_enable();
> +
> + return clock;
> +}
> +
> __bpf_kfunc_end_defs();
>
> BTF_KFUNCS_START(scx_kfunc_ids_any)
> @@ -7632,6 +7704,7 @@ BTF_ID_FLAGS(func, scx_bpf_cpu_rq)
> #ifdef CONFIG_CGROUP_SCHED
> BTF_ID_FLAGS(func, scx_bpf_task_cgroup, KF_RCU | KF_ACQUIRE)
> #endif
> +BTF_ID_FLAGS(func, scx_bpf_now_ns)
> BTF_KFUNCS_END(scx_kfunc_ids_any)
>
> static const struct btf_kfunc_id_set scx_kfunc_set_any = {
> --
> 2.47.1
>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2024-12-11 9:33 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 18+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2024-12-09 6:15 [PATCH v4 0/6] sched_ext: Support high-performance monotonically non-decreasing clock Changwoo Min
2024-12-09 6:15 ` [PATCH v4 1/6] sched_ext: Relocate scx_enabled() related code Changwoo Min
2024-12-11 7:27 ` Tejun Heo
2024-12-11 7:37 ` Tejun Heo
2024-12-09 6:15 ` [PATCH v4 2/6] sched_ext: Implement scx_rq_clock_update/stale() Changwoo Min
2024-12-09 9:40 ` Andrea Righi
2024-12-10 7:21 ` Changwoo Min
2024-12-11 7:43 ` Tejun Heo
2024-12-13 1:16 ` Changwoo Min
2024-12-09 6:15 ` [PATCH v4 3/6] sched_ext: Manage the validity of scx_rq_clock Changwoo Min
2024-12-09 6:15 ` [PATCH v4 4/6] sched_ext: Implement scx_bpf_now_ns() Changwoo Min
2024-12-11 8:14 ` Tejun Heo
2024-12-13 1:41 ` Changwoo Min
2024-12-11 9:32 ` Peter Zijlstra [this message]
2024-12-13 2:01 ` Changwoo Min
2024-12-09 6:15 ` [PATCH v4 5/6] sched_ext: Add scx_bpf_now_ns() for BPF scheduler Changwoo Min
2024-12-09 6:15 ` [PATCH v4 6/6] sched_ext: Replace bpf_ktime_get_ns() to scx_bpf_now_ns() Changwoo Min
2024-12-09 9:51 ` [PATCH v4 0/6] sched_ext: Support high-performance monotonically non-decreasing clock Andrea Righi
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=20241211093256.GY35539@noisy.programming.kicks-ass.net \
--to=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=changwoo@igalia.com \
--cc=kernel-dev@igalia.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mingo@redhat.com \
--cc=multics69@gmail.com \
--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