mirror of https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Waiman Long <longman@redhat.com>
To: "Ridong Chen" <ridong.chen@linux.dev>,
	"Tejun Heo" <tj@kernel.org>,
	"Johannes Weiner" <hannes@cmpxchg.org>,
	"Michal Koutný" <mkoutny@suse.com>
Cc: cgroups@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
	Hui Peng <benquike@gmail.com>,
	Guopeng Zhang <guopeng.zhang@linux.dev>,
	Waiman Long <longman@redhat.com>
Subject: [PATCH-next v2 1/2] cgroup/cpuset: Run SCHED_DEADLINE shrink test on valid partition root only
Date: Sun, 27 Sep 2026 17:53:18 -0400	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20260927215319.382422-2-longman@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20260927215319.382422-1-longman@redhat.com>

Commit f82f80426f7a ("sched/deadline: Ensure that updates to exclusive
cpusets don't break AC") adds a check in validate_change() to make
sure that there is enough bandwidth for SCHED_DEADLINE tasks if we
shrink a v1 exclusive cpuset that has CS_CPU_EXCLUSIVE flag set.

With the introduction of cpuset partition in cgroup v2, we keep setting
the CS_CPU_EXCLUSIVE flag for a partition root so that the SCHED_DEADLINE
check will continue to work as intended. However it turns out that the
current code isn't perfect and there are cases where a cpuset isn't
a valid partition root, but the exclusive flag is still incorrectly
set. This can leads to SCHED_DEADLINE check being incorrectly triggered
when there are deadline tasks in the system. This can result in unexpected
-EBUSY failure when making changes to cpuset control files. Fix that
by checking for a valid partition root for v2 and is_cpu_exclusive()
for v1. It is far easier and less cumbersome than to make sure that
the exclusive flag is only set for valid partition roots.

Even though commit a86ce68078b2 ("cgroup/cpuset: Extract out
CS_CPU_EXCLUSIVE & CS_SCHED_LOAD_BALANCE handling") is marked as a
commit to be fixed, the problem may exist before that.

Fixes: a86ce68078b2 ("cgroup/cpuset: Extract out CS_CPU_EXCLUSIVE & CS_SCHED_LOAD_BALANCE handling")
Signed-off-by: Waiman Long <longman@redhat.com>
---
 kernel/cgroup/cpuset.c | 7 ++++---
 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)

diff --git a/kernel/cgroup/cpuset.c b/kernel/cgroup/cpuset.c
index 753aa65afcd7..104fe10c336d 100644
--- a/kernel/cgroup/cpuset.c
+++ b/kernel/cgroup/cpuset.c
@@ -771,8 +771,8 @@ static int validate_change(struct cpuset *cur, struct cpuset *trial)
 	 * For v1, effective_cpus == cpus_allowed & user_xcpus() returns
 	 * cpus_allowed.
 	 *
-	 * For v2, is_cpu_exclusive() & is_sched_load_balance() are true only
-	 * for non-isolated partition root. At this point, the target
+	 * For v2, is_partition_valid(cur) & is_sched_load_balance() are true
+	 * only for non-isolated partition root. At this point, the target
 	 * effective_cpus isn't computed yet. user_xcpus() is the best
 	 * approximation.
 	 *
@@ -781,7 +781,8 @@ static int validate_change(struct cpuset *cur, struct cpuset *trial)
 	 * becomes an issue.
 	 */
 	ret = -EBUSY;
-	if (is_cpu_exclusive(cur) && is_sched_load_balance(cur) &&
+	if ((is_partition_valid(cur) || (!cpuset_v2() && is_cpu_exclusive(cur))) &&
+	    is_sched_load_balance(cur) &&
 	    !cpuset_cpumask_can_shrink(cur->effective_cpus, user_xcpus(trial)))
 		goto out;
 
-- 
2.55.0


  reply	other threads:[~2026-09-27 21:53 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 8+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2026-09-27 21:53 [PATCH-next v2 0/2] " Waiman Long
2026-09-27 21:53 ` Waiman Long [this message]
2026-09-28  7:46   ` [PATCH-next v2 1/2] " Ridong Chen
2026-09-28  9:32   ` Guopeng Zhang
2026-09-27 21:53 ` [PATCH-next v2 2/2] cgroup/cpuset: Remove CS_CPU_EXCLUSIVE handling code from v2 Waiman Long
2026-09-28  7:53   ` Ridong Chen
2026-09-28  9:32   ` Guopeng Zhang
2026-09-28 17:41 ` [PATCH-next v2 0/2] cgroup/cpuset: Run SCHED_DEADLINE shrink test on valid partition root only 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=20260927215319.382422-2-longman@redhat.com \
    --to=longman@redhat.com \
    --cc=benquike@gmail.com \
    --cc=cgroups@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=guopeng.zhang@linux.dev \
    --cc=hannes@cmpxchg.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=mkoutny@suse.com \
    --cc=ridong.chen@linux.dev \
    --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

all inboxes | Powered by JetHome®