From: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
To: John Stultz <jstultz@google.com>
Cc: LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
Vineeth Pillai <vineethrp@google.com>,
Sonam Sanju <sonam.sanju@intel.com>,
Sean Christopherson <seanjc@google.com>,
Kunwu Chan <kunwu.chan@linux.dev>, Tejun Heo <tj@kernel.org>,
Joel Fernandes <joelagnelf@nvidia.com>,
Qais Yousef <qyousef@layalina.io>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>,
Juri Lelli <juri.lelli@redhat.com>,
Vincent Guittot <vincent.guittot@linaro.org>,
Dietmar Eggemann <dietmar.eggemann@arm.com>,
Valentin Schneider <vschneid@redhat.com>,
Steven Rostedt <rostedt@goodmis.org>,
Will Deacon <will@kernel.org>, Waiman Long <longman@redhat.com>,
Boqun Feng <boqun.feng@gmail.com>,
"Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@kernel.org>,
Metin Kaya <Metin.Kaya@arm.com>,
Xuewen Yan <xuewen.yan94@gmail.com>,
K Prateek Nayak <kprateek.nayak@amd.com>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
Daniel Lezcano <daniel.lezcano@linaro.org>,
Suleiman Souhlal <suleiman@google.com>,
kuyo chang <kuyo.chang@mediatek.com>, hupu <hupu.gm@gmail.com>,
kernel-team@android.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 1/2] sched: proxy-exec: Close race causing workqueue work being delayed
Date: Fri, 1 May 2026 15:21:43 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20260501132143.GC1026330@noisy.programming.kicks-ass.net> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20260430215103.2978955-2-jstultz@google.com>
Sorry for being late, I was unwell for a few days :/
On Thu, Apr 30, 2026 at 09:50:46PM +0000, John Stultz wrote:
> diff --git a/include/linux/sched.h b/include/linux/sched.h
> index 368c7b4d7cb51..8b9e971d98f67 100644
> --- a/include/linux/sched.h
> +++ b/include/linux/sched.h
> @@ -2183,18 +2183,56 @@ extern int __cond_resched_rwlock_write(rwlock_t *lock) __must_hold(lock);
> #ifndef CONFIG_PREEMPT_RT
>
> /*
> - * With proxy exec, if a task has been proxy-migrated, it may be a donor
> - * on a cpu that it can't actually run on. Thus we need a special state
> - * to denote that the task is being woken, but that it needs to be
> - * evaluated for return-migration before it is run. So if the task is
> - * blocked_on PROXY_WAKING, return migrate it before running it.
> + * The proxy exec blocked_on pointer value uses the low bit as a latch
> + * value which clarifies if the blocked_on value is used for proxying or
> + * not.
> + *
> + * The state machine looks something like
> + * NULL -> ptr:unlatched -> ptr:latched -> PROXY_WAKING -> NULL
> + *
> + * With some additional transitions:
> + * ptr:unlatched -> NULL (done on current, or via set_task_blocked_on_waking())
> + * ptr:latched -> NULL (done only on current)
> + *
> + * 1) NULL and ptr:unlatched are effectively equivalent, no proxying will occur
> + * 2) ptr:latched is the state when proxying will occur
> + * 3) PROXY_WAKING is used when the task is being woken to ensure we
> + * return-migrate proxy-migrated tasks before running them (note it has
> + * the latch bit set).
> */
> -#define PROXY_WAKING ((struct mutex *)(-1L))
> +#define PROXY_BLOCKED_LATCH (1UL)
> +#define PROXY_BLOCKED_ON_MASK(x) ((struct mutex *)((unsigned long)(x) & ~PROXY_BLOCKED_LATCH))
> +#define PROXY_WAKING ((struct mutex *)(-1L)) /* PROXY_WAKING has LATCH bit set */
Urgh, please no.
You're making it needlessly complicated. There really are two separate
states, set by two different chains of logic:
- the blocked_on link, set by the blocking primitive (mutex)
- the is_blocked state, set by the scheduler when logically blocking
the task.
by munging them together like that, you also inherit that blocked_lock
into contexts that really don't need it, and you're also sprinkling
more of that sched_proxy_exec() stuff around.
If we keep them nicely separated, none of that happens, and
additionally, we might be able to get rid of the p->se.sched_delayed
(ab)use in the core code (eventually).
Does something like the below really not work?
---
diff --git a/include/linux/sched.h b/include/linux/sched.h
index 368c7b4d7cb5..0bd5da8360f3 100644
--- a/include/linux/sched.h
+++ b/include/linux/sched.h
@@ -846,7 +846,11 @@ struct task_struct {
struct alloc_tag *alloc_tag;
#endif
- int on_cpu;
+ u8 on_cpu;
+ u8 on_rq;
+ u8 is_blocked;
+ u8 __pad;
+
struct __call_single_node wake_entry;
unsigned int wakee_flips;
unsigned long wakee_flip_decay_ts;
@@ -861,7 +865,6 @@ struct task_struct {
*/
int recent_used_cpu;
int wake_cpu;
- int on_rq;
int prio;
int static_prio;
diff --git a/kernel/sched/core.c b/kernel/sched/core.c
index b8871449d3c6..f679d65d98a3 100644
--- a/kernel/sched/core.c
+++ b/kernel/sched/core.c
@@ -615,6 +615,12 @@ EXPORT_SYMBOL(__trace_set_current_state);
* [ The astute reader will observe that it is possible for two tasks on one
* CPU to have ->on_cpu = 1 at the same time. ]
*
+ * p->is_blocked <- { 0, 1 }:
+ *
+ * is set by try_to_block_task() and cleared by ttwu_do_wakeup() and tracks
+ * if the task is blocked. Tradidionally this would mirror p->on_rq, however
+ * due things like DELAY_DEQUEUE and PROXY_EXEC, this can diverge.
+ *
* task_cpu(p): is changed by set_task_cpu(), the rules are:
*
* - Don't call set_task_cpu() on a blocked task:
@@ -3685,6 +3691,7 @@ ttwu_stat(struct task_struct *p, int cpu, int wake_flags)
*/
static inline void ttwu_do_wakeup(struct task_struct *p)
{
+ p->is_blocked = 0;
WRITE_ONCE(p->__state, TASK_RUNNING);
trace_sched_wakeup(p);
}
@@ -4173,6 +4180,7 @@ int try_to_wake_up(struct task_struct *p, unsigned int state, int wake_flags)
* it disabling IRQs (this allows not taking ->pi_lock).
*/
WARN_ON_ONCE(p->se.sched_delayed);
+ WARN_ON_ONCE(p->is_blocked);
if (!ttwu_state_match(p, state, &success))
goto out;
@@ -4463,6 +4471,7 @@ static void __sched_fork(u64 clone_flags, struct task_struct *p)
/* A delayed task cannot be in clone(). */
WARN_ON_ONCE(p->se.sched_delayed);
+ WARN_ON_ONCE(p->is_blocked);
#ifdef CONFIG_FAIR_GROUP_SCHED
p->se.cfs_rq = NULL;
@@ -6593,6 +6602,8 @@ static bool try_to_block_task(struct rq *rq, struct task_struct *p,
return false;
}
+ p->is_blocked = 1;
+
/*
* We check should_block after signal_pending because we
* will want to wake the task in that case. But if
@@ -7108,7 +7119,7 @@ static void __sched notrace __schedule(int sched_mode)
struct task_struct *prev_donor = rq->donor;
rq_set_donor(rq, next);
- if (unlikely(next->blocked_on)) {
+ if (unlikely(next->is_blocked && next->blocked_on)) {
next = find_proxy_task(rq, next, &rf);
if (!next) {
zap_balance_callbacks(rq);
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2026-05-01 13:22 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 17+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2026-04-30 21:50 [PATCH v2 0/2] Proxy Execution fixes for v7.1-rc John Stultz
2026-04-30 21:50 ` [PATCH v2 1/2] sched: proxy-exec: Close race causing workqueue work being delayed John Stultz
2026-04-30 23:53 ` John Stultz
2026-05-01 6:39 ` K Prateek Nayak
2026-05-01 7:11 ` John Stultz
2026-05-01 13:21 ` Peter Zijlstra [this message]
2026-05-01 15:55 ` K Prateek Nayak
2026-05-01 18:59 ` Peter Zijlstra
2026-05-01 22:26 ` John Stultz
2026-05-03 18:42 ` K Prateek Nayak
2026-05-04 5:37 ` K Prateek Nayak
2026-05-05 3:32 ` John Stultz
2026-05-05 4:37 ` K Prateek Nayak
2026-05-04 21:33 ` John Stultz
2026-04-30 21:50 ` [PATCH v2 2/2] locking: mutex: Fix proxy-exec potentially deactivating tasks marked TASK_RUNNING John Stultz
2026-05-01 6:57 ` K Prateek Nayak
2026-05-04 22:30 ` kernel test robot
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=20260501132143.GC1026330@noisy.programming.kicks-ass.net \
--to=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=Metin.Kaya@arm.com \
--cc=boqun.feng@gmail.com \
--cc=daniel.lezcano@linaro.org \
--cc=dietmar.eggemann@arm.com \
--cc=hupu.gm@gmail.com \
--cc=joelagnelf@nvidia.com \
--cc=jstultz@google.com \
--cc=juri.lelli@redhat.com \
--cc=kernel-team@android.com \
--cc=kprateek.nayak@amd.com \
--cc=kunwu.chan@linux.dev \
--cc=kuyo.chang@mediatek.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=longman@redhat.com \
--cc=mingo@redhat.com \
--cc=paulmck@kernel.org \
--cc=qyousef@layalina.io \
--cc=rostedt@goodmis.org \
--cc=seanjc@google.com \
--cc=sonam.sanju@intel.com \
--cc=suleiman@google.com \
--cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
--cc=tj@kernel.org \
--cc=vincent.guittot@linaro.org \
--cc=vineethrp@google.com \
--cc=vschneid@redhat.com \
--cc=will@kernel.org \
--cc=xuewen.yan94@gmail.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