The Linux Kernel Mailing List
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Kuba Piecuch <jpiecuch@google.com>
To: Tejun Heo <tj@kernel.org>, Andrea Righi <arighi@nvidia.com>,
	Changwoo Min <changwoo@igalia.com>,
	 David Vernet <void@manifault.com>
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, sched-ext@lists.linux.dev,
	 Kuba Piecuch <jpiecuch@google.com>
Subject: [PATCH sched_ext/for-7.3] sched_ext: skip ops.set_weight() for disabled tasks
Date: Fri, 10 Jul 2026 14:43:41 +0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20260710144342.3802587-1-jpiecuch@google.com> (raw)

When switching a task's sched_class away from sched_ext, we get the
following sequence of events in __sched_setscheduler():

sched_change_begin()
  switched_from_scx()
    scx_disable_task(p)
      ops.disable(p)
__setscheduler_params()
  set_load_weight()
    reweight_task_scx(p)
      ops.set_weight(p)
p->sched_class = next_class;
sched_change_end()
  ...

Notably, ops.set_weight() is called _after_ ops.disable().
This violates the expected semantics of the callbacks, the expectation
being that ops.disable() can only be followed by ops.exit_task() or
ops.enable().

Skipping the weight adjustment for disabled tasks should be harmless
since the weight will be recalculated in scx_enable_task() if the task
ever rejoins SCX.

Signed-off-by: Kuba Piecuch <jpiecuch@google.com>
---
 kernel/sched/ext/ext.c | 11 +++++++++++
 1 file changed, 11 insertions(+)

diff --git a/kernel/sched/ext/ext.c b/kernel/sched/ext/ext.c
index 5241b55a58ec..b75d8d71ef4d 100644
--- a/kernel/sched/ext/ext.c
+++ b/kernel/sched/ext/ext.c
@@ -3673,6 +3673,17 @@ static void reweight_task_scx(struct rq *rq, struct task_struct *p,
 	if (task_dead_and_done(p))
 		return;
 
+	/*
+	 * When switching sched_class away from SCX, reweight_task_scx()
+	 * is called _after_ scx_disable_task(). Skip calling ops.set_weight()
+	 * since the BPF scheduler may have already forgotten the task in
+	 * ops.disable().
+	 * p->scx.weight will be recalculated in scx_enable_task() if the task
+	 * ever returns to SCX class.
+	 */
+	if (scx_get_task_state(p) != SCX_TASK_ENABLED)
+		return;
+
 	p->scx.weight = sched_weight_to_cgroup(scale_load_down(lw->weight));
 	if (SCX_HAS_OP(sch, set_weight))
 		SCX_CALL_OP_TASK(sch, set_weight, rq, p, p->scx.weight);
-- 
2.55.0.795.g602f6c329a-goog


             reply	other threads:[~2026-07-10 14:43 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 2+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2026-07-10 14:43 Kuba Piecuch [this message]
2026-07-10 16:48 ` [PATCH sched_ext/for-7.3] sched_ext: skip ops.set_weight() for disabled tasks 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=20260710144342.3802587-1-jpiecuch@google.com \
    --to=jpiecuch@google.com \
    --cc=arighi@nvidia.com \
    --cc=changwoo@igalia.com \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=sched-ext@lists.linux.dev \
    --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