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>,
"Shuah Khan" <shuah@kernel.org>
Cc: cgroups@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
linux-kselftest@vger.kernel.org, Hui Peng <benquike@gmail.com>,
Guopeng Zhang <guopeng.zhang@linux.dev>,
Waiman Long <longman@redhat.com>
Subject: [PATCH-next 4/5] cgroup/cpuset: Properly disabling partition when partition state switching fails
Date: Sat, 10 Oct 2026 04:28:47 -0400 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20261010082848.193182-5-longman@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20261010082848.193182-1-longman@redhat.com>
Before commit 103b08709e8a ("cgroup/cpuset: Fail if isolated and nohz_full
don't leave any housekeeping"), the partition state can be freely switched
from "root" to "isolated" and vice versa. After that commit, the switch
from "root" to "isolated" can fail if it exhausts all the housekeeping
CPUs. Later on, the switch from "isolated" to "root" can also fail if
some of the partition CPUs are boot-time isolated by "isolcpus".
A local or remote partition is made invalid when the switch fails.
However there are 2 problems with the existing invalidation code.
1) Both the subpartitions_cpus and isolated_cpus are not properly
updated.
2) In the case of remote partition with remote_partition flag set, it
is not cleared.
Fix this by calling the proper partition disabling function in this case.
On an x86 test system with boot option "isolcpus=10 cgroup_debug" set
and more than 16 cores, the following commands were executed after boot.
# cd /sys/fs/cgroup
# echo +cpuset > cgroup.subtree_control
# cat cpuset.cpus.isolated
10
# mkdir A
# echo 10-12 > A/cpuset.cpus
# echo isolated > A/cpuset.cpus.partition
# cat A/cpuset.cpus.partition
isolated
Before the patch:
# echo root > A/cpuset.cpus.partition
# cat A/cpuset.cpus.partition
root invalid (partition config conflicts with housekeeping setup)
# cat cpuset.cpus.isolated .__DEBUG__.cpuset.cpus.subpartitions
10-12
10-12
After the patch:
# echo root > A/cpuset.cpus.partition
# cat A/cpuset.cpus.partition
root invalid (partition config conflicts with housekeeping setup)
# cat cpuset.cpus.isolated .__DEBUG__.cpuset.cpus.subpartitions
10
Reported-by: Tejun Heo <tj@kernel.org>
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/7f4c57b26ad120ab30adf35653f1dd94@kernel.org/
Fixes: 4a74e418881f ("cgroup/cpuset: Check partition conflict with housekeeping setup")
Fixes: 103b08709e8a ("cgroup/cpuset: Fail if isolated and nohz_full don't leave any housekeeping")
Signed-off-by: Waiman Long <longman@redhat.com>
---
kernel/cgroup/cpuset.c | 17 ++++++++++++-----
1 file changed, 12 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)
diff --git a/kernel/cgroup/cpuset.c b/kernel/cgroup/cpuset.c
index 77cf6e8db0f6..aedf08cc6db5 100644
--- a/kernel/cgroup/cpuset.c
+++ b/kernel/cgroup/cpuset.c
@@ -2853,6 +2853,7 @@ static int update_prstate(struct cpuset *cs, int new_prs)
struct cpuset *parent = parent_cs(cs);
struct tmpmasks tmpmask;
bool isolcpus_updated = false;
+ bool disable_partition = false;
if (old_prs == new_prs)
return 0;
@@ -2910,15 +2911,21 @@ static int update_prstate(struct cpuset *cs, int new_prs)
*/
compute_excpus(cs, tmpmask.new_cpus);
if (prstate_housekeeping_conflict(new_prs, parent_prs,
- tmpmask.new_cpus, NULL))
+ tmpmask.new_cpus, NULL)) {
+ disable_partition = true;
err = PERR_HKEEPING;
- else
+ } else {
isolcpus_updated = true;
+ }
} else {
/*
* Switching back to member is always allowed even if it
* disables child partitions.
*/
+ disable_partition = true;
+ }
+
+ if (disable_partition) {
if (is_remote_partition(cs))
remote_partition_disable(cs, &tmpmask);
else
@@ -2927,7 +2934,7 @@ static int update_prstate(struct cpuset *cs, int new_prs)
/*
* Invalidation of child partitions will be done in
- * update_cpumasks_hier().
+ * update_cpumasks_hier() below.
*/
}
out:
@@ -2946,8 +2953,8 @@ static int update_prstate(struct cpuset *cs, int new_prs)
isolated_cpus_update(old_prs, new_prs, cs->effective_xcpus);
spin_unlock_irq(&callback_lock);
- /* Force update if switching back to member & update effective_xcpus */
- update_cpumasks_hier(cs, &tmpmask, !new_prs);
+ /* Force update if partition is disabled & update effective_xcpus */
+ update_cpumasks_hier(cs, &tmpmask, disable_partition);
/* A newly created partition must have effective_xcpus set */
WARN_ON_ONCE(!old_prs && (new_prs > 0)
--
2.55.0
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2026-10-10 8:29 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 6+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2026-10-10 8:28 [PATCH-next 0/5] cgroup/cpuset: Fix various housekeeping check problems Waiman Long
2026-10-10 8:28 ` [PATCH-next 1/5] cgroup/cpuset: Consolidate isolated_cpus_can_update() into prstate_housekeeping_conflict() Waiman Long
2026-10-10 8:28 ` [PATCH-next 2/5] cgroup/cpuset: Consider all the exclusive CPUs when doing housekeeping check Waiman Long
2026-10-10 8:28 ` [PATCH-next 3/5] cgroup/cpuset: Do housekeeping check before converting invalid partition to valid Waiman Long
2026-10-10 8:28 ` Waiman Long [this message]
2026-10-10 8:28 ` [PATCH-next 5/5] selftests/cgroup: Add tests for housekeeping check Waiman Long
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=20261010082848.193182-5-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=linux-kselftest@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mkoutny@suse.com \
--cc=ridong.chen@linux.dev \
--cc=shuah@kernel.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
all inboxes | Powered by JetHome®