From: Andrea Righi <arighi@nvidia.com>
To: Tejun Heo <tj@kernel.org>
Cc: David Vernet <void@manifault.com>,
Changwoo Min <changwoo@igalia.com>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>,
Juri Lelli <juri.lelli@redhat.com>,
Vincent Guittot <vincent.guittot@linaro.org>,
Dietmar Eggemann <dietmar.eggemann@arm.com>,
Steven Rostedt <rostedt@goodmis.org>,
Ben Segall <bsegall@google.com>, Mel Gorman <mgorman@suse.de>,
Valentin Schneider <vschneid@redhat.com>,
K Prateek Nayak <kprateek.nayak@amd.com>,
Vladimir Vdovin <deliran@verdict.gg>,
Emil Tsalapatis <etsal@meta.com>,
Christian Loehle <christian.loehle@arm.com>,
Balbir Singh <balbirs@nvidia.com>,
Lee Trager <ltrager@nvidia.com>,
sched-ext@lists.linux.dev, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCHSET sched_ext/for-7.4] sched_ext: Add NUMA balancing support
Date: Fri, 9 Oct 2026 23:03:42 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <aslWrnlHYy9b5lEm@gpd4> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <61b9a8607e1f25ffd316f13135432581@kernel.org>
Hi Tejun,
On Thu, Oct 08, 2026 at 08:23:16AM -1000, Tejun Heo wrote:
> Hello, Andrea.
>
> On Sun, Oct 04, 2026 at 09:27:06AM +0200, Andrea Righi wrote:
> > This series lets a BPF scheduler opt into the NUMA hinting-fault scan with
> > SCX_OPS_NUMA_BALANCING. The existing scan is driven from the sched_ext tick for
> > the tasks of such a scheduler, and the hinting faults then work for them as they
> > do for fair tasks: the kernel maintains their NUMA fault statistics and
> > preferred node, and migrates the memory a task accesses toward the node it runs
> > on. The tasks themselves are not migrated: their placement is left to the BPF
> > scheduler.
> >
> > The resulting preferred node is exposed to BPF schedulers with
> > scx_bpf_task_numa_nid(), which they can use to keep a task close to its memory
> > when placing or balancing it. The value is advisory; nothing in the kernel acts
> > on it for these tasks.
>
> Is there a reason to gate this on a separate ops flag? An alternative would be
> an op which is called when a task's preferred node changes, with the initial
> node reported on enable like ops.set_weight(), and enabling the hinting-fault
> scan iff the op is implemented. The scheduler then gets an event it can act on
> rather than a value to poll. The node has a single writer, sched_setnuma(),
> which already dequeues and re-enqueues the task under the rq lock, so the op
> can be called from there the same way ops.set_weight() is called from the
> reweight path.
Yeah, there's no particular reason to use a separate ops flag. I think I like
the ops callback approach that reports the preferred node and enables the
hinting-fault scan when the callback is implemented. Maybe something like:
void (*set_numa_node)(struct task_struct *p, s32 nid);
Calling it from sched_setnuma() under the rq lock should also simplify the code
and lets the BPF scheduler update its placement state before the task is
re-enqueued.
I'll do some experiments with this approach and send a new version.
Thanks,
-Andrea
prev parent reply other threads:[~2026-10-09 21:03 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 11+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2026-10-04 7:27 [PATCHSET sched_ext/for-7.4] sched_ext: Add NUMA balancing support Andrea Righi
2026-10-04 7:27 ` [PATCH 1/5] sched/numa: Let other scheduling classes drive NUMA scanning Andrea Righi
2026-10-04 7:27 ` [PATCH 2/5] sched/numa: Leave the placement of a BPF-scheduled task to its scheduler Andrea Righi
2026-10-04 7:27 ` [PATCH 3/5] sched_ext: Scan NUMA hinting faults for opted-in BPF schedulers Andrea Righi
2026-10-05 11:30 ` Vladimir Vdovin
2026-10-05 21:37 ` Andrea Righi
2026-10-04 7:27 ` [PATCH 4/5] sched_ext: Add scx_bpf_task_numa_nid() Andrea Righi
2026-10-04 7:27 ` [PATCH 5/5] selftests/sched_ext: Add a test for scx_bpf_task_numa_nid() Andrea Righi
2026-10-06 14:40 ` [PATCHSET sched_ext/for-7.4] sched_ext: Add NUMA balancing support Vladimir Vdovin
2026-10-08 18:23 ` Tejun Heo
2026-10-09 21:03 ` Andrea Righi [this message]
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=aslWrnlHYy9b5lEm@gpd4 \
--to=arighi@nvidia.com \
--cc=balbirs@nvidia.com \
--cc=bsegall@google.com \
--cc=changwoo@igalia.com \
--cc=christian.loehle@arm.com \
--cc=deliran@verdict.gg \
--cc=dietmar.eggemann@arm.com \
--cc=etsal@meta.com \
--cc=juri.lelli@redhat.com \
--cc=kprateek.nayak@amd.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=ltrager@nvidia.com \
--cc=mgorman@suse.de \
--cc=mingo@redhat.com \
--cc=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=rostedt@goodmis.org \
--cc=sched-ext@lists.linux.dev \
--cc=tj@kernel.org \
--cc=vincent.guittot@linaro.org \
--cc=void@manifault.com \
--cc=vschneid@redhat.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