From: Andrea Righi <arighi@nvidia.com>
To: Christian Loehle <christian.loehle@arm.com>
Cc: tj@kernel.org, void@manifault.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
sched-ext@lists.linux.dev, changwoo@igalia.com, hodgesd@meta.com,
mingo@redhat.com, peterz@infradead.org, jake@hillion.co.uk
Subject: Re: [PATCH v5 2/3] sched_ext: Introduce scx_bpf_remote_curr()
Date: Tue, 2 Sep 2025 07:43:42 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <aLaEDuOEPT_9VOMO@gpd4> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20250901132605.2282650-4-christian.loehle@arm.com>
Hi Christian,
On Mon, Sep 01, 2025 at 02:26:03PM +0100, Christian Loehle wrote:
> Provide scx_bpf_remote_curr() as a way for scx schedulers to check the curr
> task of a remote rq without assuming its lock is held.
>
> Many scx schedulers make use of scx_bpf_cpu_rq() to check a remote curr
> (e.g. to see if it should be preempted). This is problematic because
> scx_bpf_cpu_rq() provides access to all fields of struct rq, most of
> which aren't safe to use without holding the associated rq lock.
>
> Signed-off-by: Christian Loehle <christian.loehle@arm.com>
> ---
> kernel/sched/ext.c | 14 ++++++++++++++
> tools/sched_ext/include/scx/common.bpf.h | 1 +
> 2 files changed, 15 insertions(+)
>
> diff --git a/kernel/sched/ext.c b/kernel/sched/ext.c
> index 9fcc310d85d5..e242a2520f06 100644
> --- a/kernel/sched/ext.c
> +++ b/kernel/sched/ext.c
> @@ -7452,6 +7452,19 @@ __bpf_kfunc struct rq *scx_bpf_cpu_rq_locked(void)
> return rq;
> }
>
> +/**
> + * scx_bpf_remote_curr - Return remote CPU's curr task
> + * @cpu: CPU of interest
> + *
> + * Callers must hold RCU read lock (KF_RCU).
> + */
> +__bpf_kfunc struct task_struct *scx_bpf_remote_curr(s32 cpu)
> +{
> + if (!kf_cpu_valid(cpu, NULL))
> + return NULL;
> + return READ_ONCE(cpu_rq(cpu)->curr);
It shouldn't be rcu_dereference(cpu_rq(cpu)->curr)?
Thanks,
-Andrea
> +}
> +
> /**
> * scx_bpf_task_cgroup - Return the sched cgroup of a task
> * @p: task of interest
> @@ -7617,6 +7630,7 @@ BTF_ID_FLAGS(func, scx_bpf_task_running, KF_RCU)
> BTF_ID_FLAGS(func, scx_bpf_task_cpu, KF_RCU)
> BTF_ID_FLAGS(func, scx_bpf_cpu_rq)
> BTF_ID_FLAGS(func, scx_bpf_cpu_rq_locked, KF_RET_NULL)
> +BTF_ID_FLAGS(func, scx_bpf_remote_curr, KF_RET_NULL | KF_RCU)
> #ifdef CONFIG_CGROUP_SCHED
> BTF_ID_FLAGS(func, scx_bpf_task_cgroup, KF_RCU | KF_ACQUIRE)
> #endif
> diff --git a/tools/sched_ext/include/scx/common.bpf.h b/tools/sched_ext/include/scx/common.bpf.h
> index f5be06c93359..dd3d94256c10 100644
> --- a/tools/sched_ext/include/scx/common.bpf.h
> +++ b/tools/sched_ext/include/scx/common.bpf.h
> @@ -92,6 +92,7 @@ bool scx_bpf_task_running(const struct task_struct *p) __ksym;
> s32 scx_bpf_task_cpu(const struct task_struct *p) __ksym;
> struct rq *scx_bpf_cpu_rq(s32 cpu) __ksym;
> struct rq *scx_bpf_cpu_rq_locked(void) __ksym;
> +struct task_struct *scx_bpf_remote_curr(s32 cpu) __ksym;
> struct cgroup *scx_bpf_task_cgroup(struct task_struct *p) __ksym __weak;
> u64 scx_bpf_now(void) __ksym __weak;
> void scx_bpf_events(struct scx_event_stats *events, size_t events__sz) __ksym __weak;
> --
> 2.34.1
>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2025-09-02 5:44 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 12+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2025-09-01 13:26 [PATCH v4 0/3] sched_ext: Harden scx_bpf_cpu_rq() Christian Loehle
2025-09-01 13:26 ` [PATCH v5 " Christian Loehle
2025-09-01 13:38 ` Christian Loehle
2025-09-01 13:26 ` [PATCH v5 1/3] sched_ext: Introduce scx_bpf_cpu_rq_locked() Christian Loehle
2025-09-03 15:54 ` Tejun Heo
2025-09-01 13:26 ` [PATCH v5 2/3] sched_ext: Introduce scx_bpf_remote_curr() Christian Loehle
2025-09-02 5:43 ` Andrea Righi [this message]
2025-09-03 15:55 ` Tejun Heo
2025-09-01 13:26 ` [PATCH v5 3/3] sched_ext: deprecation warn for scx_bpf_cpu_rq() Christian Loehle
2025-09-03 15:56 ` Tejun Heo
2025-09-03 20:37 ` Christian Loehle
2025-09-01 13:26 ` [PATCH v5 0/3] sched_ext: Harden scx_bpf_cpu_rq() Christian Loehle
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=aLaEDuOEPT_9VOMO@gpd4 \
--to=arighi@nvidia.com \
--cc=changwoo@igalia.com \
--cc=christian.loehle@arm.com \
--cc=hodgesd@meta.com \
--cc=jake@hillion.co.uk \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mingo@redhat.com \
--cc=peterz@infradead.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;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).