Re: [PATCH 12/36] sched_ext: Implement BPF extensible scheduler class

[Joel Fernandes]

Hello Tejun,

On Fri, Nov 10, 2023 at 04:47:38PM -1000, Tejun Heo wrote:
[..]
> +/*
> + * Omitted operations:
> + *
> + * - wakeup_preempt: NOOP as it isn't useful in the wakeup path because the task
> + *   isn't tied to the CPU at that point.
> + *
> + * - migrate_task_rq: Unncessary as task to cpu mapping is transient.
> + *
> + * - task_fork/dead: We need fork/dead notifications for all tasks regardless of
> + *   their current sched_class. Call them directly from sched core instead.
> + *
> + * - task_woken, switched_from: Unnecessary.
> + */
> +DEFINE_SCHED_CLASS(ext) = {
> +	.enqueue_task		= enqueue_task_scx,
> +	.dequeue_task		= dequeue_task_scx,
> +	.yield_task		= yield_task_scx,
> +	.yield_to_task		= yield_to_task_scx,
> +
> +	.wakeup_preempt		= wakeup_preempt_scx,

I was wondering about the comment above related to 'wakeup_preempt', could
you clarify why it is not useful (NOOP) in the sched-ext class?

wakeup_preempt() may be called via:
sched_ttwu_pending() ->
	ttwu_do_activate() ->
		wakeup_preempt()
			

at which point the enqueue of the task could have already happened via:

sched_ttwu_pending() ->
	ttwu_do_activate() ->
		activate_task() ->
			enqueue_task()

But the comment above says "task isn't tied to the CPU" ?

Apologies in advance if I missed something as I just recently starting
looking into the sched-ext patches.

thanks!

 - Joel