public inbox for linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
To: Tejun Heo <tj@kernel.org>
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, mingo@redhat.com,
	juri.lelli@redhat.com, vincent.guittot@linaro.org,
	dietmar.eggemann@arm.com, rostedt@goodmis.org,
	bsegall@google.com, mgorman@suse.de, vschneid@redhat.com,
	longman@redhat.com, hannes@cmpxchg.org, mkoutny@suse.com,
	void@manifault.com, arighi@nvidia.com, changwoo@igalia.com,
	cgroups@vger.kernel.org, sched-ext@lists.linux.dev,
	liuwenfang@honor.com, tglx@linutronix.de
Subject: Re: [PATCH 13/14] sched: Add {DE,EN}QUEUE_LOCKED
Date: Thu, 25 Sep 2025 15:10:25 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20250925131025.GA4067720@noisy.programming.kicks-ass.net> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <aMRLIEtmcWc0XNmg@slm.duckdns.org>

On Fri, Sep 12, 2025 at 06:32:32AM -1000, Tejun Heo wrote:
> Hello,
> 
> On Fri, Sep 12, 2025 at 04:19:04PM +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> ...
> > Ah, but I think we *have* to change it :/ The thing is that with the new
> > pick you can change 'rq' without holding the source rq->lock. So we
> > can't maintain this list.
> > 
> > Could something like so work?
> > 
> > 	scoped_guard (rcu) for_each_process_thread(g, p) {
> > 		if (p->flags & PF_EXITING || p->sched_class != ext_sched_class)
> > 			continue;
> > 
> > 		guard(task_rq_lock)(p);
> > 		scoped_guard (sched_change, p) {
> > 			/* no-op */
> > 		}
> > 	}	
> 
> Yeah, or I can make scx_tasks iteration smarter so that it can skip through
> the list for tasks which aren't runnable. As long as it doesn't do lock ops
> on every task, it should be fine. I think this is solvable one way or
> another. Let's continue in the other subthread.

Well, either this or scx_tasks iterator will result in lock ops for
every task, this is unavoidable if we want the normal p->pi_lock,
rq->lock (dsq->lock) taken for every sched_change caller.

I have the below which I would like to include in the series such that I
can clean up all that DEQUEUE_LOCKED stuff a bit, this being the only
sched_change that's 'weird'.

Added 'bonus' is of course one less user of the runnable_list.

(also, I have to note, for_each_cpu with preemption disabled is asking
for trouble, the enormous core count machines are no longer super
esoteric)

--- a/kernel/sched/ext.c
+++ b/kernel/sched/ext.c
@@ -4817,6 +4817,7 @@ static void scx_bypass(bool bypass)
 {
 	static DEFINE_RAW_SPINLOCK(bypass_lock);
 	static unsigned long bypass_timestamp;
+	struct task_struct *g, *p;
 	struct scx_sched *sch;
 	unsigned long flags;
 	int cpu;
@@ -4849,16 +4850,16 @@ static void scx_bypass(bool bypass)
 	 * queued tasks are re-queued according to the new scx_rq_bypassing()
 	 * state. As an optimization, walk each rq's runnable_list instead of
 	 * the scx_tasks list.
-	 *
-	 * This function can't trust the scheduler and thus can't use
-	 * cpus_read_lock(). Walk all possible CPUs instead of online.
+	 */
+
+	/*
+	 * XXX online_mask is stable due to !preempt (per bypass_lock)
+	 * so could this be for_each_online_cpu() ?
 	 */
 	for_each_possible_cpu(cpu) {
 		struct rq *rq = cpu_rq(cpu);
-		struct task_struct *p, *n;
 
 		raw_spin_rq_lock(rq);
-
 		if (bypass) {
 			WARN_ON_ONCE(rq->scx.flags & SCX_RQ_BYPASSING);
 			rq->scx.flags |= SCX_RQ_BYPASSING;
@@ -4866,36 +4867,33 @@ static void scx_bypass(bool bypass)
 			WARN_ON_ONCE(!(rq->scx.flags & SCX_RQ_BYPASSING));
 			rq->scx.flags &= ~SCX_RQ_BYPASSING;
 		}
+		raw_spin_rq_unlock(rq);
+	}
+
+	/* implicit RCU section due to bypass_lock */
+	for_each_process_thread(g, p) {
+		unsigned int state;
 
-		/*
-		 * We need to guarantee that no tasks are on the BPF scheduler
-		 * while bypassing. Either we see enabled or the enable path
-		 * sees scx_rq_bypassing() before moving tasks to SCX.
-		 */
-		if (!scx_enabled()) {
-			raw_spin_rq_unlock(rq);
+		guard(raw_spinlock)(&p->pi_lock);
+		if (p->flags & PF_EXITING || p->sched_class != &ext_sched_class)
+			continue;
+
+		state = READ_ONCE(p->__state);
+		if (state != TASK_RUNNING && state != TASK_WAKING)
 			continue;
-		}
 
-		/*
-		 * The use of list_for_each_entry_safe_reverse() is required
-		 * because each task is going to be removed from and added back
-		 * to the runnable_list during iteration. Because they're added
-		 * to the tail of the list, safe reverse iteration can still
-		 * visit all nodes.
-		 */
-		list_for_each_entry_safe_reverse(p, n, &rq->scx.runnable_list,
-						 scx.runnable_node) {
-			/* cycling deq/enq is enough, see the function comment */
-			scoped_guard (sched_change, p, DEQUEUE_SAVE | DEQUEUE_MOVE) {
-				/* nothing */ ;
-			}
+		guard(__task_rq_lock)(p);
+		scoped_guard (sched_change, p, DEQUEUE_SAVE | DEQUEUE_MOVE) {
+			/* nothing */ ;
 		}
+	}
 
-		/* resched to restore ticks and idle state */
-		if (cpu_online(cpu) || cpu == smp_processor_id())
-			resched_curr(rq);
+	/* implicit !preempt section due to bypass_lock */
+	for_each_online_cpu(cpu) {
+		struct rq *rq = cpu_rq(cpu);
 
+		raw_spin_rq_lock(rq);
+		resched_curr(cpu_rq(cpu));
 		raw_spin_rq_unlock(rq);
 	}
 

  parent reply	other threads:[~2025-09-25 13:10 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 68+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2025-09-10 15:44 [PATCH 00/14] sched: Support shared runqueue locking Peter Zijlstra
2025-09-10 15:44 ` [PATCH 01/14] sched: Employ sched_change guards Peter Zijlstra
2025-09-11  9:06   ` K Prateek Nayak
2025-09-11  9:55     ` Peter Zijlstra
2025-09-11 10:10       ` Peter Zijlstra
2025-09-11 10:37         ` K Prateek Nayak
2025-10-06 15:21   ` Shrikanth Hegde
2025-10-06 18:14     ` Peter Zijlstra
2025-10-07  5:12       ` Shrikanth Hegde
2025-10-07  9:34         ` Peter Zijlstra
2025-10-16  9:33       ` [tip: sched/core] sched: Mandate shared flags for sched_change tip-bot2 for Peter Zijlstra
2025-09-10 15:44 ` [PATCH 02/14] sched: Re-arrange the {EN,DE}QUEUE flags Peter Zijlstra
2025-09-10 15:44 ` [PATCH 03/14] sched: Fold sched_class::switch{ing,ed}_{to,from}() into the change pattern Peter Zijlstra
2025-09-10 15:44 ` [PATCH 04/14] sched: Cleanup sched_delayed handling for class switches Peter Zijlstra
2025-09-10 15:44 ` [PATCH 05/14] sched: Move sched_class::prio_changed() into the change pattern Peter Zijlstra
2025-09-11  1:44   ` Tejun Heo
2025-09-10 15:44 ` [PATCH 06/14] sched: Fix migrate_disable_switch() locking Peter Zijlstra
2025-09-10 15:44 ` [PATCH 07/14] sched: Fix do_set_cpus_allowed() locking Peter Zijlstra
2025-10-30  0:12   ` Mark Brown
2025-10-30  9:07     ` Peter Zijlstra
2025-10-30 12:47       ` Mark Brown
2025-09-10 15:44 ` [PATCH 08/14] sched: Rename do_set_cpus_allowed() Peter Zijlstra
2025-09-10 15:44 ` [PATCH 09/14] sched: Make __do_set_cpus_allowed() use the sched_change pattern Peter Zijlstra
2025-09-10 15:44 ` [PATCH 10/14] sched: Add locking comments to sched_class methods Peter Zijlstra
2025-09-10 15:44 ` [PATCH 11/14] sched: Add flags to {put_prev,set_next}_task() methods Peter Zijlstra
2025-09-10 15:44 ` [PATCH 12/14] sched: Add shared runqueue locking to __task_rq_lock() Peter Zijlstra
2025-09-12  0:19   ` Tejun Heo
2025-09-12 11:54     ` Peter Zijlstra
2025-09-12 14:11       ` Peter Zijlstra
2025-09-12 17:56       ` Tejun Heo
2025-09-15  8:38         ` Peter Zijlstra
2025-09-16 22:29           ` Tejun Heo
2025-09-16 22:41             ` Tejun Heo
2025-09-25  8:35               ` Peter Zijlstra
2025-09-25 21:43                 ` Tejun Heo
2025-09-26  9:59                   ` Peter Zijlstra
2025-09-26 16:48                     ` Tejun Heo
2025-09-26 10:36                   ` Peter Zijlstra
2025-09-26 21:39                     ` Tejun Heo
2025-09-29 10:06                       ` Peter Zijlstra
2025-09-30 23:49                         ` Tejun Heo
2025-10-01 11:54                           ` Peter Zijlstra
2025-10-02 23:32                             ` Tejun Heo
2025-09-10 15:44 ` [PATCH 13/14] sched: Add {DE,EN}QUEUE_LOCKED Peter Zijlstra
2025-09-11  2:01   ` Tejun Heo
2025-09-11  9:42     ` Peter Zijlstra
2025-09-11 20:40       ` Tejun Heo
2025-09-12 14:19         ` Peter Zijlstra
2025-09-12 16:32           ` Tejun Heo
2025-09-13 22:32             ` Tejun Heo
2025-09-15  8:48               ` Peter Zijlstra
2025-09-25 13:10             ` Peter Zijlstra [this message]
2025-09-25 15:40               ` Tejun Heo
2025-09-25 15:53                 ` Peter Zijlstra
2025-09-25 18:44                   ` Tejun Heo
2025-09-10 15:44 ` [PATCH 14/14] sched/ext: Implement p->srq_lock support Peter Zijlstra
2025-09-10 16:07   ` Peter Zijlstra
2025-09-10 17:32 ` [PATCH 00/14] sched: Support shared runqueue locking Andrea Righi
2025-09-10 18:19   ` Peter Zijlstra
2025-09-10 18:35   ` Peter Zijlstra
2025-09-10 19:00     ` Andrea Righi
2025-09-11  9:58     ` Peter Zijlstra
2025-09-11 14:51       ` Andrea Righi
2025-09-11 14:00   ` Peter Zijlstra
2025-09-11 14:30     ` Peter Zijlstra
2025-09-11 14:48       ` Andrea Righi
2025-09-18 15:15 ` Christian Loehle
2025-09-25  9:00   ` Peter Zijlstra

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=20250925131025.GA4067720@noisy.programming.kicks-ass.net \
    --to=peterz@infradead.org \
    --cc=arighi@nvidia.com \
    --cc=bsegall@google.com \
    --cc=cgroups@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=changwoo@igalia.com \
    --cc=dietmar.eggemann@arm.com \
    --cc=hannes@cmpxchg.org \
    --cc=juri.lelli@redhat.com \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=liuwenfang@honor.com \
    --cc=longman@redhat.com \
    --cc=mgorman@suse.de \
    --cc=mingo@redhat.com \
    --cc=mkoutny@suse.com \
    --cc=rostedt@goodmis.org \
    --cc=sched-ext@lists.linux.dev \
    --cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
    --cc=tj@kernel.org \
    --cc=vincent.guittot@linaro.org \
    --cc=void@manifault.com \
    --cc=vschneid@redhat.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