From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from smtp.kernel.org (aws-us-west-2-korg-mail-1.web.codeaurora.org [10.30.226.201]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id A10B320ADD6; Thu, 11 Sep 2025 02:01:56 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=10.30.226.201 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1757556116; cv=none; b=WXZHP02TU6yHcLc6+TT4lB+j8/DQHKT0KUn7qYA2C26MNBf4hyVEzlwnsunwfMJKCzWZWOeJS5x98A/76h+6apyJwrZUIPbF6HqqBRbjy7GCPGmQg5S6I+61YRZcS0Jx5FdXmEvyvs+DIs16Bx8oKgSCdbrUgpVeMnDy/3tQdXA= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1757556116; c=relaxed/simple; bh=M4vZtHDVg/z2yDq3EPvR1/N1D3KTDv8X9LniEfN5BcM=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:Message-ID:References:MIME-Version: Content-Type:Content-Disposition:In-Reply-To; b=DCZtINpE8g9FJ0+b/FPqXvBVGjOFd7BlvvLRwdoFbPnbUXanZmQjAc4MToH5MTzJhmQONlnKuI/GLR+UITS9UEdYpxm2ApBKnAzgnGQJjYTTXk5SRuzAAoWQSs5Oebxv6YRFlfyccMJZHXUiIomvrChRoKm7sSgEziu8LbnhCyU= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=kernel.org header.i=@kernel.org header.b=JVFT2FaN; arc=none smtp.client-ip=10.30.226.201 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=kernel.org header.i=@kernel.org header.b="JVFT2FaN" Received: by smtp.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 14FFFC4CEF0; Thu, 11 Sep 2025 02:01:56 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=kernel.org; s=k20201202; t=1757556116; bh=M4vZtHDVg/z2yDq3EPvR1/N1D3KTDv8X9LniEfN5BcM=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:References:In-Reply-To:From; b=JVFT2FaNxdoz7WjlYRaU2KocZJNQ1rzTZwSfSShX8nGumRK0RD09dbVq2/pvDK3pu Mgv+/fc1k1DBfVVYyzL0FWrVQmoD3vl0BpYugAztRnPiRVwy5heD3BVJFQ5exWAlvq Abw2RvH2xJeRjIGQnx9uTX2/ESMYpifUyfB0btcfOKfANpfolPvveS0b9lkAeTgMUQ BFPIJBGxIWCsm7khkXzqLFTHbxT/fnd7pde2dZSHn4Zo7XLFlNJUU9hh2KbqAKoAIR 9J+Lgi//ezj1vqUG3IYQAHRpDEViRx2NtlPa7adVY/DadaF7MVH6AJgHclliK2u57g 3uXTlI9cEWgQA== Date: Wed, 10 Sep 2025 16:01:55 -1000 From: Tejun Heo To: Peter Zijlstra Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, mingo@redhat.com, juri.lelli@redhat.com, vincent.guittot@linaro.org, dietmar.eggemann@arm.com, rostedt@goodmis.org, bsegall@google.com, mgorman@suse.de, vschneid@redhat.com, longman@redhat.com, hannes@cmpxchg.org, mkoutny@suse.com, void@manifault.com, arighi@nvidia.com, changwoo@igalia.com, cgroups@vger.kernel.org, sched-ext@lists.linux.dev, liuwenfang@honor.com, tglx@linutronix.de Subject: Re: [PATCH 13/14] sched: Add {DE,EN}QUEUE_LOCKED Message-ID: References: <20250910154409.446470175@infradead.org> <20250910155809.800554594@infradead.org> Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20250910155809.800554594@infradead.org> Hello, Peter. On Wed, Sep 10, 2025 at 05:44:22PM +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote: > Provide a LOCKED queue flag, indicating that the {en,de}queue() > operation is in task_rq_lock() context. > > Note: the sched_change in scx_bypass() is the only one that does not > use task_rq_lock(). If that were fixed, we could have sched_change > imply LOCKED. I don't see any harm in doing task_rq_lock() in the scx_bypass() loop. Please feel free to switch that for simplicity. Thanks. -- tejun