From: Andrea Righi <arighi@nvidia.com>
To: Cheng-Yang Chou <yphbchou0911@gmail.com>
Cc: sched-ext@lists.linux.dev, Tejun Heo <tj@kernel.org>,
David Vernet <void@manifault.com>,
Changwoo Min <changwoo@igalia.com>,
"Paul E . McKenney" <paulmck@kernel.org>,
rcu@vger.kernel.org, Ching-Chun Huang <jserv@ccns.ncku.edu.tw>,
Chia-Ping Tsai <chia7712@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] sched_ext: Fix exit_cpu accuracy for lockup paths
Date: Tue, 9 Jun 2026 07:10:14 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <aiegNmIT5mZij8KP@gpd4> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20260531152646.1206799-2-yphbchou0911@gmail.com>
Hi Cheng-Yang,
On Sun, May 31, 2026 at 11:25:26PM +0800, Cheng-Yang Chou wrote:
> handle_lockup() uses raw_smp_processor_id() for exit_cpu, which is wrong
> for two paths:
>
> - scx_hardlockup_irq_workfn() has the hung CPU in a local variable but
> irq_work may run elsewhere. Pass the local cpu explicitly.
> - scx_rcu_cpu_stall() records the detector CPU rather than the stalled
> one. Pass -1 for now. The next patch fixes this properly.
>
> Signed-off-by: Cheng-Yang Chou <yphbchou0911@gmail.com>
Small nit below, apart than that looks good me.
Reviewed-by: Andrea Righi <arighi@nvidia.com>
> ---
> kernel/sched/ext.c | 12 +++++++-----
> kernel/sched/ext_internal.h | 2 --
> 2 files changed, 7 insertions(+), 7 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/kernel/sched/ext.c b/kernel/sched/ext.c
> index ffad1a90196f..0c37b5fd58b0 100644
> --- a/kernel/sched/ext.c
> +++ b/kernel/sched/ext.c
> @@ -5205,6 +5205,7 @@ bool scx_allow_ttwu_queue(const struct task_struct *p)
>
> /**
> * handle_lockup - sched_ext common lockup handler
> + * @exit_cpu: CPU to record in exit_info. Pass the stalled/hung CPU, not current.
> * @fmt: format string
> *
> * Called on system stall or lockup condition and initiates abort of sched_ext
> @@ -5214,7 +5215,7 @@ bool scx_allow_ttwu_queue(const struct task_struct *p)
> * resolve the lockup. %false if sched_ext is not enabled or abort was already
> * initiated by someone else.
> */
> -static __printf(1, 2) bool handle_lockup(const char *fmt, ...)
> +static __printf(2, 3) bool handle_lockup(int exit_cpu, const char *fmt, ...)
> {
> struct scx_sched *sch;
> va_list args;
> @@ -5230,7 +5231,7 @@ static __printf(1, 2) bool handle_lockup(const char *fmt, ...)
> case SCX_ENABLING:
> case SCX_ENABLED:
> va_start(args, fmt);
> - ret = scx_verror(sch, fmt, args);
> + ret = scx_vexit(sch, SCX_EXIT_ERROR, 0, exit_cpu, fmt, args);
> va_end(args);
> return ret;
> default:
> @@ -5252,7 +5253,7 @@ static __printf(1, 2) bool handle_lockup(const char *fmt, ...)
> */
> bool scx_rcu_cpu_stall(void)
> {
> - return handle_lockup("RCU CPU stall detected!");
> + return handle_lockup(-1, "RCU CPU stall detected!");
> }
>
> /**
> @@ -5267,7 +5268,8 @@ bool scx_rcu_cpu_stall(void)
> */
> void scx_softlockup(u32 dur_s)
> {
> - if (!handle_lockup("soft lockup - CPU %d stuck for %us", smp_processor_id(), dur_s))
> + if (!handle_lockup(smp_processor_id(), "soft lockup - CPU %d stuck for %us",
> + smp_processor_id(), dur_s))
nit: maybe we can use smp_processor_id() once here, like:
int cpu = smp_processor_id();
if (!handle_lockup(cpu, ..., cpu, dur_s))
Thanks,
-Andrea
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2026-06-09 5:10 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 10+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2026-05-31 15:25 [PATCH v6 sched_ext/for-7.2 0/2] sched_ext: Follow-up fixes for exit_cpu accuracy Cheng-Yang Chou
2026-05-31 15:25 ` [PATCH 1/2] sched_ext: Fix exit_cpu accuracy for lockup paths Cheng-Yang Chou
2026-06-09 5:10 ` Andrea Righi [this message]
2026-05-31 15:25 ` [PATCH 2/2] sched_ext, rcu: Upgrade RCU stall paths to report cpumask of stalled CPUs Cheng-Yang Chou
2026-06-04 17:57 ` Paul E. McKenney
2026-06-05 14:33 ` Cheng-Yang Chou
2026-06-09 8:06 ` Andrea Righi
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2026-06-10 15:26 [PATCH v7 sched_ext/for-7.2 0/2] sched_ext: Follow-up fixes for exit_cpu accuracy Cheng-Yang Chou
2026-06-10 15:26 ` [PATCH 1/2] sched_ext: Fix exit_cpu accuracy for lockup paths Cheng-Yang Chou
2026-05-21 16:16 [PATCH v5 sched_ext/for-7.2 0/2] sched_ext: Follow-up fixes for exit_cpu accuracy Cheng-Yang Chou
2026-05-21 16:16 ` [PATCH 1/2] sched_ext: Fix exit_cpu accuracy for lockup paths Cheng-Yang Chou
2026-05-19 17:17 [PATCH v4 sched_ext/for-7.2 0/2] sched_ext: Follow-up fixes for exit_cpu accuracy Cheng-Yang Chou
2026-05-19 17:17 ` [PATCH 1/2] sched_ext: Fix exit_cpu accuracy for lockup paths Cheng-Yang Chou
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=aiegNmIT5mZij8KP@gpd4 \
--to=arighi@nvidia.com \
--cc=changwoo@igalia.com \
--cc=chia7712@gmail.com \
--cc=jserv@ccns.ncku.edu.tw \
--cc=paulmck@kernel.org \
--cc=rcu@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=sched-ext@lists.linux.dev \
--cc=tj@kernel.org \
--cc=void@manifault.com \
--cc=yphbchou0911@gmail.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