Re: [PATCH sched_ext/for-7.1] sched_ext: Documentation: Add missing calls to quiescent(), runnable()

Kuba Piecuch
2026-04-08T12:40:11Z

Hi Andrea,

On Wed Apr 8, 2026 at 11:28 AM UTC, Andrea Righi wrote:
...
>
> Looks good, but I noticed another issue, should we also change the condition up
> above as following?
>
> Documentation/scheduler/sched-ext.rst | 2 +-
> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
>
> diff --git a/Documentation/scheduler/sched-ext.rst b/Documentation/scheduler/sched-ext.rst
> index 29d36e248f58b..99df4cc982375 100644
> --- a/Documentation/scheduler/sched-ext.rst
> +++ b/Documentation/scheduler/sched-ext.rst
> @@ -423,7 +423,7 @@ by a sched_ext scheduler:
> ops.runnable(); /* Task becomes ready to run */
>
> while (task_is_runnable(task)) {
> - if (task is not in a DSQ && task->scx.slice == 0) {
> + if (task is not in a DSQ || task->scx.slice == 0) {
> ops.enqueue(); /* Task can be added to a DSQ */
>
> /* Task property change (i.e., affinity, nice, etc.)? */
>
> Because we trigger ops.enqueue() when the task expired its time slice or it
> becomes runnable and has not been added to a DSQ.
>
> This also represents correctly the sched_change() scenario: a task being
> re-enqueued after sched_change() still has its time slice > 0, but we need to
> call ops.enqueue() for it.

I agree that the condition should be changed, but I'm not sure that this is
what it should look like.

Is the "task is not in a DSQ" part of the condition there to handle direct
dispatch? Apart from direct dispatch from ops.select_cpu(), I wasn't able to
come up with a situation where we would reach this condition with the task
present on some DSQ.

A more general comment about the pseudocode: I think it can be useful to
introduce someone new to the general flow of the callbacks in sched_ext,
but the documentation should be clear that this is a simplified view that
makes assumptions about the behavior of the BPF scheduler itself (flags like
SCX_OPS_ENQ_LAST, whether the scheduler uses direct dispatch), as well as
the overall system (Can sched_ext be preempted by a higher-priority sched
class? Can scheduling properties of a task be changed while it's running?)
Without stating these assumptions clearly, we risk leaving the reader falsely
believing they have a complete understanding.

Thanks,
Kuba