Re: [PATCH v6 2/6] sched_ext: Implement scx_bpf_now_ns()

[Changwoo Min]

Hello,

On 24. 12. 25. 06:47, Tejun Heo wrote:
> Hello,
>
> On Fri, Dec 20, 2024 at 03:20:21PM +0900, Changwoo Min wrote:
> ...
> > +__bpf_kfunc u64 scx_bpf_now_ns(void)
>
> Given that the default time unit is ns for the scheduler, the _ns suffix
> can probably go.

Ok. I will change is as suggested.

>

> > +	if (!(READ_ONCE(rq->scx.flags) & SCX_RQ_CLK_VALID)) {
> > +		clock = sched_clock_cpu(cpu_of(rq));
> > +
> > +		/*
> > +		 * The rq clock is updated outside of the rq lock.
> > +		 * In this case, keep the updated rq clock invalid so the next
> > +		 * kfunc call outside the rq lock gets a fresh rq clock.
> > +		 */
> > +		scx_rq_clock_update(rq, clock, false);
>
> Hmm... what does this update do?
It can be dropped as we do not track prev_clock.


> ...
> > +static inline void scx_rq_clock_update(struct rq *rq, u64 clock, bool valid)
> > +{
> > +	if (!scx_enabled())
> > +		return;
> > +	WRITE_ONCE(rq->scx.clock, clock);
> > +	if (valid)
> > +		WRITE_ONCE(rq->scx.flags, rq->scx.flags | SCX_RQ_CLK_VALID);
> > +}
>
> Isn't rq->scx.clock used iff VALID is set? If so, why does !VALID read need
> to update rq->scx.clock?

If we drop the previous scx_rq_clock_update(.., false),  we can
drop the if condition checking the valid flag.

Regards,
Changwoo Min