public inbox for linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
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
> 

  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