From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1751936Ab3HUOS5 (ORCPT ); Wed, 21 Aug 2013 10:18:57 -0400 Received: from mail-qc0-f182.google.com ([209.85.216.182]:63012 "EHLO mail-qc0-f182.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751836Ab3HUOSz (ORCPT ); Wed, 21 Aug 2013 10:18:55 -0400 Date: Wed, 21 Aug 2013 10:18:51 -0400 From: Tejun Heo To: Li Zefan Cc: LKML , Cgroups , Containers Subject: Re: [PATCH 10/11] cpuset: allow writing offlined masks to cpuset.cpus/mems Message-ID: <20130821141851.GJ19286@mtj.dyndns.org> References: <52148F52.0@huawei.com> <52148FF1.5060503@huawei.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <52148FF1.5060503@huawei.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Hello, On Wed, Aug 21, 2013 at 06:01:21PM +0800, Li Zefan wrote: > - if (!cpumask_subset(trialcs->cpus_allowed, cpu_active_mask)) > + if (!cpumask_subset(trialcs->cpus_allowed, > + top_cpuset.cpus_allowed)) Hmmm... top_cpuset.cpus_allowed is filled using cpumask_setall(), which may include more bits than cpu_possible_mask, which is kinda weird. We probably wanna initialize it with cpu_possible_mask and also maybe using cpu_possible_mask in the above would be clearer? Also, shouldn't this be dependent upon sane_behavior? Thanks. -- tejun