From: Andrea Righi <arighi@nvidia.com>
To: Samuele Mariotti <smariotti@disroot.org>
Cc: tj@kernel.org, void@manifault.com, changwoo@igalia.com,
sched-ext@lists.linux.dev, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
Paolo Valente <paolo.valente@unimore.it>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] sched_ext: Fix spurious WARN on stale ops_state in ops_dequeue()
Date: Wed, 13 May 2026 18:49:07 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <agSrg_UpQ5fdQ_OL@gpd4> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <agSpf9QRx4zqhZxx@cachyos>
On Wed, May 13, 2026 at 06:41:26PM +0200, Samuele Mariotti wrote:
...
> Thanks for the suggestion. I agree with adding cpu_relax() and the
> retry limit to preserve the original WARN_ON_ONCE() as a safety net
> for real bugs.
>
> Given the improvements to efficiency, I would also improve the non-atomic
> read of p->scx.flags by using READ_ONCE(), preventing the compiler from
> caching the value across retries and ensuring each iteration observes the
> latest value written by the concurrent finish_dispatch(). I would also
> lower the retry limit from 128 to 4, since the maximum number of retries
> observed empirically is 1, so 4 gives a reasonable safety margin without
> spinning unnecessarily long.
>
> Something like this:
>
> if (!(READ_ONCE(p->scx.flags) & SCX_TASK_IN_CUSTODY) &&
> !WARN_ON_ONCE(retries++ >= 4)) {
> cpu_relax();
> goto retry;
> }
>
> Let me know if this looks good to you.
Yeah, that sounds reasonable to me.
Thanks,
-Andrea
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2026-05-13 16:49 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 5+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2026-05-13 9:53 [PATCH] sched_ext: Fix spurious WARN on stale ops_state in ops_dequeue() Samuele Mariotti
2026-05-13 14:26 ` Andrea Righi
2026-05-13 16:41 ` Samuele Mariotti
2026-05-13 16:49 ` Andrea Righi [this message]
2026-05-13 20:01 ` 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=agSrg_UpQ5fdQ_OL@gpd4 \
--to=arighi@nvidia.com \
--cc=changwoo@igalia.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=paolo.valente@unimore.it \
--cc=sched-ext@lists.linux.dev \
--cc=smariotti@disroot.org \
--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