|
Add a new kselftest to validate that the new ops.dequeue() semantics
work correctly for all task lifecycle scenarios, including the
distinction between terminal DSQs (where BPF scheduler is done with the
task), user DSQs (where BPF scheduler manages the task lifecycle) and
BPF data structures, regardless of which event performs the dispatch.
The test validates the following scenarios:
- From ops.select_cpu():
- scenario 0 (local DSQ): tasks dispatched to the local DSQ bypass
the BPF scheduler entirely; they never enter BPF custody, so
ops.dequeue() is not called,
- scenario 1 (global DSQ): tasks dispatched to SCX_DSQ_GLOBAL also
bypass the BPF scheduler, like the local DSQ; ops.dequeue() is
not called,
- scenario 2 (user DSQ): tasks dispatched to user DSQs from
ops.select_cpu(): tasks enter BPF scheduler's custody with full
enqueue/dequeue lifecycle tracking and state machine validation,
expects 1:1 enqueue/dequeue pairing,
- From ops.enqueue():
- scenario 3 (local DSQ): same behavior as scenario 0,
- scenario 4 (global DSQ): same behavior as scenario 1,
- scenario 5 (user DSQ): same behavior as scenario 2,
- scenario 6 (BPF internal queue): tasks are stored in a BPF queue
from ops.enqueue() and consumed from ops.dispatch(); similarly to
scenario 5, tasks enter BPF scheduler's custody with full
lifecycle tracking and 1:1 enqueue/dequeue validation.
This verifies that:
- terminal DSQ dispatch (local, global) don't trigger ops.dequeue(),
- tasks dispatched to user DSQs, either from ops.select_cpu() or
ops.enqueue(), enter BPF scheduler's custody and have exact 1:1
enqueue/dequeue pairing,
- tasks stored to internal BPF data structures from ops.enqueue() enter
BPF scheduler's custody and have exact 1:1 enqueue/dequeue pairing,
- dispatch dequeues have no flags (normal workflow),
- property change dequeues have the %SCX_DEQ_SCHED_CHANGE flag set,
- no duplicate enqueues or invalid state transitions are happening.
Cc: Tejun Heo <tj@kernel.org>
Cc: Emil Tsalapatis <emil@etsalapatis.com>
Cc: Kuba Piecuch <jpiecuch@google.com>
Reviewed-by: Daniel Jordan <daniel.m.jordan@oracle.com>
Signed-off-by: Andrea Righi <arighi@nvidia.com>
Signed-off-by: Tejun Heo <tj@kernel.org>
|
