From: sashiko-bot@kernel.org
To: "Andrea Righi" <arighi@nvidia.com>
Cc: sched-ext@lists.linux.dev
Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/9] sched_ext: Fix TOCTOU race in consume_remote_task()
Date: Mon, 06 Jul 2026 07:24:33 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20260706072434.65F1D1F000E9@smtp.kernel.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20260706070410.282826-4-arighi@nvidia.com>
Thank you for your contribution! Sashiko AI review found 1 potential issue(s) to consider:
Pre-existing issues:
- [High] Pre-existing tracking bug in dispatch_to_local_dsq(): it drops the locked_rq lock without clearing the scx_locked_rq_state tracking, which triggers a lockdep crash if a nested ops.dequeue() callback executes in the fallback path.
--
commit aff47a8e37704807f1fefe8e15adcb99c8836308
Author: Andrea Righi <arighi@nvidia.com>
sched_ext: Fix TOCTOU race in consume_remote_task()
This commit addresses a TOCTOU race condition in sched_ext during task
migration between runqueues. It ensures task eligibility is re-evaluated
after locking the source runqueue and properly tracks runqueue lock state
while dropping the lock to avoid lockdep warnings.
> diff --git a/kernel/sched/ext/ext.c b/kernel/sched/ext/ext.c
> index 242f6ffbba350..4c6cd694c86db 100644
> --- a/kernel/sched/ext/ext.c
> +++ b/kernel/sched/ext/ext.c
[ ... ]
> @@ -2240,20 +2246,58 @@ static bool unlink_dsq_and_lock_src_rq(struct task_struct *p,
> !WARN_ON_ONCE(src_rq != task_rq(p));
> }
>
> -static bool consume_remote_task(struct rq *this_rq,
> +static bool consume_remote_task(struct scx_sched *sch, struct rq *this_rq,
> struct task_struct *p, u64 enq_flags,
> struct scx_dispatch_q *dsq, struct rq *src_rq)
> {
> + struct rq *tracked_rq = scx_locked_rq();
> + bool consumed = false;
> +
> + /*
> + * consume_remote_task() may be called from an SCX op with @this_rq
> + * recorded as the currently locked rq. Clear the tracking while the rq
> + * lock is dropped so nested callbacks don't save and later try to restore
> + * an rq which isn't locked anymore.
> + */
> + if (tracked_rq) {
> + WARN_ON_ONCE(tracked_rq != this_rq);
> + update_locked_rq(NULL);
> + }
> raw_spin_rq_unlock(this_rq);
[Severity: High]
This is a pre-existing issue, but does dispatch_to_local_dsq() have a similar
problem with stale rq lock tracking?
Similar to consume_remote_task(), dispatch_to_local_dsq() drops the locked_rq
without temporarily clearing scx_locked_rq_state:
kernel/sched/ext/ext.c:dispatch_to_local_dsq() {
...
/* switch to @src_rq lock */
if (locked_rq != src_rq) {
raw_spin_rq_unlock(locked_rq);
locked_rq = src_rq;
raw_spin_rq_lock(src_rq);
}
...
}
If task_can_run_on_remote_rq() fails, it falls back to enqueueing to the global
DSQ:
} else if (unlikely(!task_can_run_on_remote_rq(sch, p, dst_rq, true))) {
p->scx.holding_cpu = -1;
fallback = true;
scx_dispatch_enqueue(sch, src_rq, find_global_dsq(sch, task_cpu(p)),
p, enq_flags | SCX_ENQ_GDSQ_FALLBACK);
When scx_dispatch_enqueue() triggers the nested ops.dequeue() callback via
SCX_CALL_OP_TASK, the stale, unlocked rq state is saved and later restored
in SCX_CALL_OP, which triggers a lockdep assertion failure.
Could this lead to a lockdep crash if a nested ops.dequeue() executes in the
fallback path?
--
Sashiko AI review · https://sashiko.dev/#/patchset/20260706070410.282826-1-arighi@nvidia.com?part=3
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2026-07-06 7:24 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 16+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2026-07-06 6:50 [PATCHSET v3 sched_ext/for-7.3] sched: Make proxy execution compatible with sched_ext Andrea Righi
2026-07-06 6:50 ` [PATCH 1/9] sched/core: Drop mutex locks before proxy rescheduling Andrea Righi
2026-07-06 8:45 ` K Prateek Nayak
2026-07-06 6:50 ` [PATCH 2/9] sched_ext: Split curr|donor references properly Andrea Righi
2026-07-06 7:35 ` sashiko-bot
2026-07-06 6:50 ` [PATCH 3/9] sched_ext: Fix TOCTOU race in consume_remote_task() Andrea Righi
2026-07-06 7:24 ` sashiko-bot [this message]
2026-07-06 6:50 ` [PATCH 4/9] sched_ext: Handle blocked donor migration with proxy execution Andrea Righi
2026-07-06 7:21 ` sashiko-bot
2026-07-06 6:51 ` [PATCH 5/9] sched_ext: Fix ops.running/stopping() pairing for proxy-exec donors Andrea Righi
2026-07-06 6:51 ` [PATCH 6/9] sched_ext: Delegate proxy donor admission to BPF schedulers Andrea Righi
2026-07-06 7:36 ` sashiko-bot
2026-07-06 7:49 ` K Prateek Nayak
2026-07-06 6:51 ` [PATCH 7/9] sched_ext: Add selftest for blocked donor admission Andrea Righi
2026-07-06 6:51 ` [PATCH 8/9] sched_ext: scx_qmap: Add proxy execution support Andrea Righi
2026-07-06 6:51 ` [PATCH 9/9] sched: Allow enabling proxy exec with sched_ext 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=20260706072434.65F1D1F000E9@smtp.kernel.org \
--to=sashiko-bot@kernel.org \
--cc=arighi@nvidia.com \
--cc=sashiko-reviews@lists.linux.dev \
--cc=sched-ext@lists.linux.dev \
/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