From: Tejun Heo <tj@kernel.org>
To: David Vernet <void@manifault.com>,
Andrea Righi <arighi@nvidia.com>,
Changwoo Min <changwoo@igalia.com>
Cc: sched-ext@lists.linux.dev, emil@etsalapatis.com,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
Cheng-Yang Chou <yphbchou0911@gmail.com>,
Zhao Mengmeng <zhaomzhao@126.com>, Tejun Heo <tj@kernel.org>
Subject: [PATCH 04/17] sched_ext: Shift scx_kick_cpu() validity check to scx_bpf_kick_cpu()
Date: Thu, 23 Apr 2026 15:32:07 -1000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20260424013220.2923402-5-tj@kernel.org> (raw)
Callers that already know the cpu is valid shouldn't have to pay for a
redundant check. scx_kick_cpu() is called from the in-kernel balance loop
break-out path with the current cpu (trivially valid) and from
scx_bpf_kick_cpu() with a BPF-supplied cpu that does need validation. Move
the check out of scx_kick_cpu() into scx_bpf_kick_cpu() so the backend is
reusable by callers that have already validated.
Signed-off-by: Tejun Heo <tj@kernel.org>
Reviewed-by: Cheng-Yang Chou <yphbchou0911@gmail.com>
---
kernel/sched/ext.c | 5 +----
1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 4 deletions(-)
diff --git a/kernel/sched/ext.c b/kernel/sched/ext.c
index d57ba3df0c8c..a94e621d2c6c 100644
--- a/kernel/sched/ext.c
+++ b/kernel/sched/ext.c
@@ -8674,9 +8674,6 @@ static void scx_kick_cpu(struct scx_sched *sch, s32 cpu, u64 flags)
struct rq *this_rq;
unsigned long irq_flags;
- if (!scx_cpu_valid(sch, cpu, NULL))
- return;
-
local_irq_save(irq_flags);
this_rq = this_rq();
@@ -8739,7 +8736,7 @@ __bpf_kfunc void scx_bpf_kick_cpu(s32 cpu, u64 flags, const struct bpf_prog_aux
guard(rcu)();
sch = scx_prog_sched(aux);
- if (likely(sch))
+ if (likely(sch) && scx_cpu_valid(sch, cpu, NULL))
scx_kick_cpu(sch, cpu, flags);
}
--
2.53.0
next reply other threads:[~2026-04-24 1:32 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 4+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2026-04-24 1:32 Tejun Heo [this message]
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2026-04-24 17:27 [PATCHSET v2 REPOST sched_ext/for-7.2] sched_ext: Topological CPU IDs and cid-form struct_ops Tejun Heo
2026-04-24 17:27 ` [PATCH 04/17] sched_ext: Shift scx_kick_cpu() validity check to scx_bpf_kick_cpu() Tejun Heo
2026-04-28 20:35 [PATCHSET v3 sched_ext/for-7.2] sched_ext: Topological CPU IDs and cid-form struct_ops Tejun Heo
2026-04-28 20:35 ` [PATCH 04/17] sched_ext: Shift scx_kick_cpu() validity check to scx_bpf_kick_cpu() Tejun Heo
2026-04-29 18:21 [PATCHSET v4 sched_ext/for-7.2] sched_ext: Topological CPU IDs and cid-form struct_ops Tejun Heo
2026-04-29 18:21 ` [PATCH 04/17] sched_ext: Shift scx_kick_cpu() validity check to scx_bpf_kick_cpu() 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=20260424013220.2923402-5-tj@kernel.org \
--to=tj@kernel.org \
--cc=arighi@nvidia.com \
--cc=changwoo@igalia.com \
--cc=emil@etsalapatis.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=sched-ext@lists.linux.dev \
--cc=void@manifault.com \
--cc=yphbchou0911@gmail.com \
--cc=zhaomzhao@126.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