Re: [PATCH v3 1/2] sched/uclamp: Fix race condition leading to imbalanced uclamp_rq

[Christian Loehle]

On 10/28/26 02:05, Qais Yousef wrote:
> Static keys are not guaranteed to be enabled atomically across CPUs.
> Which means when sched_uclamp_used is enabled, some CPUs will return
> true for uclamp_is_used() while others won't, leading to asymmetric
> ulcamp_rq_{inc, dec}_id. If we decrement without increment this is safe
> as documented in the code. But an increment without a decrement is
> a problem and will leave the uclamp_rq in a corrupt state.
> 
> The race for increment without a decrement is interesting as it means
> a CPU has seen the static key flipped and incremented while enqueueing
> a task, but the task was dequeued on another CPU that hasn't seen the
> static key flipped - we need to be wary this might be a symptom of
> something else going wrong.
> 
> Plugging the race is hard as discussed in [1]. Take it for granted and
> do correction actions on going to idle to guarantee this state is
> transient for a short period after uclamp_sched_used is enabled.
> 
> [1] https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/CANDhNCqyXsZ6G77z+9s=rTO6BZifRG9+hVxMTah+tAv6pB6h3w@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx/
> 
> Reported-by: Wei Wang <wvw@xxxxxxxxxx>
> Fixes: 46609ce227039 ("sched/uclamp: Protect uclamp fast path code with static key")
> Signed-off-by: Qais Yousef <qyousef@xxxxxxxxxxx>
> ---
>  kernel/sched/core.c  |  2 +-
>  kernel/sched/idle.c  | 17 +++++++++++++++++
>  kernel/sched/sched.h |  3 +++
>  3 files changed, 21 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
> 
> diff --git a/kernel/sched/core.c b/kernel/sched/core.c
> index d7c3b43158dea..c6780358a7975 100644
> --- a/kernel/sched/core.c
> +++ b/kernel/sched/core.c
> @@ -2111,7 +2111,7 @@ static void uclamp_post_fork(struct task_struct *p)
>  	uclamp_update_util_min_rt_default(p);
>  }
>  
> -static void __init init_uclamp_rq(struct rq *rq)
> +void init_uclamp_rq(struct rq *rq)
>  {
>  	enum uclamp_id clamp_id;
>  	struct uclamp_rq *uc_rq = rq->uclamp;
> diff --git a/kernel/sched/idle.c b/kernel/sched/idle.c
> index 76f3c84ca6846..c722b23e07dc2 100644
> --- a/kernel/sched/idle.c
> +++ b/kernel/sched/idle.c
> @@ -502,6 +502,23 @@ static void set_next_task_idle(struct rq *rq, struct task_struct *next, enum snt
>  	 * lost_idle_time of clock_pelt
>  	 */
>  	update_idle_rq_clock_pelt(rq);
> +
> +	/*
> +	 * Due to a race condition when enabling sched_uclamp_used static key,
> +	 * we can end up with imbalance where uclamp_rq_inc_id() has happened
> +	 * on a CPU without uclamp_rq_dec_id() on another CPU that hasn't seen
> +	 * the static key flipped. The race condition is unlikely, but ensure
> +	 * the uclamp_rq() state is set properly on each entry to idle.
> +	 *
> +	 * The reset will cause the uclamp_max from uclamp_idle_value() to be
> +	 * lost. Since we are imbalanced, hard to know what is right. So just
> +	 * cleanup. This should be a transient error state once we recover
> +	 * everything should work as expected.
> +	 */
> +	if (uclamp_is_used()) {
> +		if (unlikely(!uclamp_rq_is_idle(rq)))
> +			init_uclamp_rq(rq);
> +	}
>  }
>  


I haven't checked the other cases, but sashiko notes a few issues with this.
The sched_ext one and the core-scheduling cases seem legitimate, i.e. the idle
task may be scheduled while the rq actually isn't idle and clamps should be
maintained?