From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from smtp.kernel.org (aws-us-west-2-korg-mail-alma10-1.taild15c8.ts.net [100.103.45.18]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id C13933E171C; Thu, 9 Jul 2026 22:28:44 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=100.103.45.18 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1783636126; cv=none; b=iNYTCRwbrpC4uxJdkDTu1wX2MdWfC6/i74W07mnX3NtDI++wmBJimmE4J13Ok+DprG8A8a1PLvXNFx1Xx1yG9L85uRXQEQiGdphuTEyry+tFjAsMRhLYkCKXPIxEAUfSowRMTzbTSuy2wcZVz1+cGuboiF5xDMfIiAQJpJGm2tk= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1783636126; c=relaxed/simple; bh=zwGZRRJ2oRDqW2zaKxS5nwkAlH6De4VMSSS47NHmC8w=; h=Date:Message-ID:From:To:Cc:In-Reply-To:References:Subject; b=DWpV1qngc7TXDSspVN6jJt4jJtExYNrzUaxyWFKyfjmfVR6ll38ITjjaGxiGRiaJ+XoJcX5qPTIKYq46dam8bZ1cS8vKY2XBmXRR8xjtIzXQXwaYZr3qxIhICNz5yrvFr/9qvT0qb+Op4h9RCdXRrWd17jZzBsgwR41oV/AwXoU= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=kernel.org header.i=@kernel.org header.b=OQIgTXBv; arc=none smtp.client-ip=100.103.45.18 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=kernel.org header.i=@kernel.org header.b="OQIgTXBv" Received: by smtp.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 51C531F000E9; Thu, 9 Jul 2026 22:28:44 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=kernel.org; s=k20260515; t=1783636124; bh=FUGllrpi6X4OIOp1Lgkry8O7iu6KO1kd82usB4AQEjo=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:In-Reply-To:References:Subject; b=OQIgTXBvtVqxySE4dNM4+NgqFWs3vvvYIKWL6nY6PJq/KdEzz4l7oErrDV5yrndBZ +dG3WHe1LPO1sgU6iRo/YAZXoZJVNSuf4qhySs+UoT8PiBsTmir3QfaJOyugULxLcd sJui9kQWoRlR2yHbshHmnzk/Jjz5tsNP7gkfZN4q6AewJRk/NknNNtsKQXquTO25WA Jf8zQGb/+V1Q1N/R+ZYZmmXpVYS9DHDNlOYuIZwYtXjQAQg8molgYr1N9OVVxxyUiE wf7sOGv3A7enLQ7laWyAvjiPy45OKOQigBYi5GtOO8ph5VVgm2g8oZOvHkmFnswncB Yht5r7Xy+yApA== Date: Thu, 09 Jul 2026 12:28:43 -1000 Message-ID: From: Tejun Heo To: sashiko-bot@kernel.org Cc: David Vernet , Andrea Righi , Changwoo Min , sched-ext@lists.linux.dev, Emil Tsalapatis , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org In-Reply-To: <20260708215333.747381F000E9@smtp.kernel.org> References: <20260708212429.3405787-1-tj@kernel.org> <20260708212429.3405787-30-tj@kernel.org> <20260708215333.747381F000E9@smtp.kernel.org> Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 sched_ext/for-7.3 29/40] sched_ext: Route task slice writes through set_task_slice() Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: sched-ext@lists.linux.dev List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: On Wed, 08 Jul 2026 21:53:32 +0000, sashiko-bot@kernel.org wrote: > This is a pre-existing issue, but does this lockless write to the > task's slice create a dangerous data race with update_curr_scx()? The lockless write this race needs no longer exists after this and the following two patches: scx_bpf_task_set_slice() writes p->scx.slice directly only when the caller holds the task's current rq lock, and every other caller is routed through the deferred slice_oob path, drained under the rq lock at the top of update_curr_scx() before the min_t(). Thanks. -- tejun