From: Will Deacon <will@kernel.org>
To: Waiman Long <longman@redhat.com>
Cc: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, kernel-team@android.com,
Zefan Li <lizefan.x@bytedance.com>, Tejun Heo <tj@kernel.org>,
Johannes Weiner <hannes@cmpxchg.org>,
cgroups@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] cpuset: Fix cpuset_cpus_allowed() to not filter offline CPUs
Date: Fri, 3 Feb 2023 11:50:46 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20230203115045.GB5927@willie-the-truck> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <773e2f22-211e-163f-64bb-15ae29ad161b@redhat.com>
On Wed, Feb 01, 2023 at 10:34:00PM -0500, Waiman Long wrote:
> On 2/1/23 16:10, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> > On Wed, Feb 01, 2023 at 01:46:11PM -0500, Waiman Long wrote:
> >
> > > Note that using cpus_allowed directly in cgroup v2 may not be right because
> > > cpus_allowed may have no relationship to effective_cpus at all in some
> > > cases, e.g.
> > >
> > > root
> > > |
> > > V
> > > A (cpus_allowed = 1-4, effective_cpus = 1-4)
> > > |
> > > V
> > > B (cpus_allowed = 5-8, effective_cpus = 1-4)
> > >
> > > In the case of cpuset B, passing back cpus 5-8 as the allowed_cpus is wrong.
> > I think my patch as written does the right thing here. Since the
> > intersection of (1-4) and (5-8) is empty it will move up the hierarchy
> > and we'll end up with (1-4) from the cgroup side of things.
> >
> > So the purpose of __cs_cpus_allowed() is to override the cpus_allowed of
> > the root set and force it to cpu_possible_mask.
> >
> > Then cs_cpus_allowed() computes the intersection of cs->cpus_allowed and
> > all it's parents. This will, in the case of B above, result in the empty
> > mask.
> >
> > Then cpuset_cpus_allowed() has a loop that starts with
> > task_cpu_possible_mask(), intersects that with cs_cpus_allowed() and if
> > the intersection of that and cpu_online_mask is empty, moves up the
> > hierarchy. Given cs_cpus_allowed(B) is the empty mask, we'll move to A.
> >
> > Note that since we force the mask of root to cpu_possible_mask,
> > cs_cpus_allowed(root) will be a no-op and if we guarantee (in arch code)
> > that cpu_online_mask always has a non-empty intersection with
> > task_cpu_possible_mask(), this loop is guaranteed to terminate with a
> > viable mask.
>
> I will take a closer look at that tomorrow. I will be more comfortable
> ack'ing that if this is specific to v1 cpuset instead of applying this in
> both v1 and v2 since it is only v1 that is problematic.
fwiw, the regression I'm seeing is with cgroup2. I haven't tried v1.
WIll
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2023-02-03 11:51 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 31+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2023-01-31 22:17 [PATCH 0/2] Fix broken cpuset affinity handling on heterogeneous systems Will Deacon
2023-01-31 22:17 ` [PATCH 1/2] cpuset: Fix cpuset_cpus_allowed() to not filter offline CPUs Will Deacon
2023-02-01 4:14 ` Waiman Long
2023-02-01 9:14 ` Peter Zijlstra
2023-02-01 15:16 ` Waiman Long
2023-02-01 18:46 ` Waiman Long
2023-02-01 19:14 ` Waiman Long
2023-02-01 19:17 ` Waiman Long
2023-02-01 21:10 ` Peter Zijlstra
2023-02-02 3:34 ` Waiman Long
2023-02-03 11:50 ` Will Deacon [this message]
2023-02-03 15:13 ` Waiman Long
2023-02-03 15:26 ` Peter Zijlstra
2023-02-03 15:35 ` Waiman Long
2023-02-02 8:34 ` Peter Zijlstra
2023-02-02 16:06 ` Waiman Long
2023-02-02 19:42 ` Peter Zijlstra
2023-02-02 20:46 ` Waiman Long
2023-02-02 20:48 ` Tejun Heo
2023-02-02 20:53 ` Waiman Long
2023-02-02 21:05 ` Waiman Long
2023-02-02 21:50 ` Tejun Heo
2023-02-03 0:54 ` Waiman Long
2023-02-03 16:31 ` Will Deacon
2023-01-31 22:17 ` [PATCH 2/2] cpuset: Call set_cpus_allowed_ptr() with appropriate mask for task Will Deacon
2023-02-01 2:22 ` Waiman Long
2023-02-01 9:15 ` Peter Zijlstra
2023-02-01 15:03 ` Waiman Long
2023-02-01 9:27 ` Peter Zijlstra
2023-02-03 17:55 ` Waiman Long
2023-02-06 20:21 ` Tejun Heo
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20230203115045.GB5927@willie-the-truck \
--to=will@kernel.org \
--cc=cgroups@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=hannes@cmpxchg.org \
--cc=kernel-team@android.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=lizefan.x@bytedance.com \
--cc=longman@redhat.com \
--cc=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=tj@kernel.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).