From: Kuba Piecuch <jpiecuch@google.com>
To: Andrea Righi <arighi@nvidia.com>, Tejun Heo <tj@kernel.org>,
David Vernet <void@manifault.com>,
Changwoo Min <changwoo@igalia.com>
Cc: Kuba Piecuch <jpiecuch@google.com>, <sched-ext@lists.linux.dev>,
<linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] selftests/sched_ext: Make allowed_cpus idle validation race-free
Date: Fri, 31 Jul 2026 11:12:09 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <DKCPMDMRE6FN.3EII6EE13O4SY@google.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20260731090334.2911948-3-arighi@nvidia.com>
Hi Andrea,
On Fri Jul 31, 2026 at 8:59 AM UTC, Andrea Righi wrote:
> A remotely selected CPU can be re-advertised as idle by an idle-to-idle
> re-pick before the BPF program validates the selection. Checking that
> the selected CPU remains absent from the idle mask is therefore
> inherently racy.
>
> Validate the stable local invariant instead: a CPU running a non-idle
> scheduling context in ops.select_cpu() must not be advertised as idle.
That invariant sounds like it should hold in many contexts, not just in
ops.select_cpu(). Is there something preventing us from checking it in
ops.enqueue() as well?
> Also validate both the requested domain and task affinity for selected
> CPUs.
>
> Signed-off-by: Andrea Righi <arighi@nvidia.com>
> ---
> .../selftests/sched_ext/allowed_cpus.bpf.c | 43 ++++++++++++++++---
> 1 file changed, 36 insertions(+), 7 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/sched_ext/allowed_cpus.bpf.c b/tools/testing/selftests/sched_ext/allowed_cpus.bpf.c
> index 35923e74a2ec3..411a7edcb9605 100644
> --- a/tools/testing/selftests/sched_ext/allowed_cpus.bpf.c
> +++ b/tools/testing/selftests/sched_ext/allowed_cpus.bpf.c
> @@ -15,15 +15,43 @@ UEI_DEFINE(uei);
> private(PREF_CPUS) struct bpf_cpumask __kptr * allowed_cpumask;
>
> static void
> -validate_idle_cpu(const struct task_struct *p, const struct cpumask *allowed, s32 cpu)
> +validate_local_idle_state(void)
> {
> - if (scx_bpf_test_and_clear_cpu_idle(cpu))
> - scx_bpf_error("CPU %d should be marked as busy", cpu);
> + struct task_struct *curr;
> + s32 cpu = bpf_get_smp_processor_id();
> + bool curr_is_idle;
>
> - if (bpf_cpumask_subset(allowed, p->cpus_ptr) &&
> - !bpf_cpumask_test_cpu(cpu, allowed))
> + bpf_rcu_read_lock();
> + curr = scx_bpf_cpu_curr(cpu);
> + curr_is_idle = curr && (curr->flags & PF_IDLE);
> + bpf_rcu_read_unlock();
> +
> + /*
> + * Unlike a remote selected CPU, the local CPU cannot go through an
> + * idle re-pick while this callback is running. If it is running a
> + * non-idle scheduling context, it must not be advertised as idle.
> + */
> + if (!curr_is_idle && scx_bpf_test_and_clear_cpu_idle(cpu))
> + scx_bpf_error("running CPU %d should be marked as busy", cpu);
Could we check a stronger invariant by also checking that the bit in the idle
mask is set if we're running an idle task? We can get the idle cpumask through
scx_bpf_get_idle_cpumask() and check bits without clearing them using
bpf_cpumask_test_cpu().
> +}
> +
> +static void
> +validate_selected_cpu(const struct task_struct *p, s32 cpu)
> +{
> + const struct cpumask *allowed = cast_mask(allowed_cpumask);
> +
> + if (!allowed) {
> + scx_bpf_error("allowed domain not initialized");
> + return;
> + }
> +
> + if (!bpf_cpumask_test_cpu(cpu, allowed))
> scx_bpf_error("CPU %d not in the allowed domain for %d (%s)",
> cpu, p->pid, p->comm);
> +
> + if (!bpf_cpumask_test_cpu(cpu, p->cpus_ptr))
> + scx_bpf_error("CPU %d not in the affinity mask for %d (%s)",
> + cpu, p->pid, p->comm);
> }
>
> s32 BPF_STRUCT_OPS(allowed_cpus_select_cpu,
> @@ -42,8 +70,9 @@ s32 BPF_STRUCT_OPS(allowed_cpus_select_cpu,
> * Select an idle CPU strictly within the allowed domain.
> */
> cpu = scx_bpf_select_cpu_and(p, prev_cpu, wake_flags, allowed, 0);
> + validate_local_idle_state();
> if (cpu >= 0) {
> - validate_idle_cpu(p, allowed, cpu);
> + validate_selected_cpu(p, cpu);
> scx_bpf_dsq_insert(p, SCX_DSQ_LOCAL, SCX_SLICE_DFL, 0);
>
> return cpu;
> @@ -71,7 +100,7 @@ void BPF_STRUCT_OPS(allowed_cpus_enqueue, struct task_struct *p, u64 enq_flags)
> */
> cpu = scx_bpf_select_cpu_and(p, prev_cpu, 0, allowed, 0);
> if (cpu >= 0) {
> - validate_idle_cpu(p, allowed, cpu);
> + validate_selected_cpu(p, cpu);
> scx_bpf_kick_cpu(cpu, SCX_KICK_IDLE);
> }
> }
Thanks,
Kuba
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2026-07-31 11:12 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 7+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2026-07-31 8:59 [PATCHSET v2 sched_ext/for-7.3] sched_ext: Fix idle CPU state initialization and validation Andrea Righi
2026-07-31 8:59 ` [PATCH 1/2] sched_ext: Initialize idle masks before ops.init() Andrea Righi
2026-07-31 10:47 ` Kuba Piecuch
2026-07-31 15:01 ` Andrea Righi
2026-07-31 8:59 ` [PATCH 2/2] selftests/sched_ext: Make allowed_cpus idle validation race-free Andrea Righi
2026-07-31 11:12 ` Kuba Piecuch [this message]
2026-07-31 15:26 ` 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=DKCPMDMRE6FN.3EII6EE13O4SY@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