From: Chen Ridong <chenridong@huaweicloud.com>
To: "Sun Shaojie" <sunshaojie@kylinos.cn>,
"Waiman Long" <longman@redhat.com>, "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
Subject: Re: [PATCH] cgroup/cpuset: Return only actually allocated CPUs during partition invalidation
Date: Wed, 13 May 2026 14:55:25 +0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <2bcc3436-b928-4a6d-be73-d22735e972ec@huaweicloud.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20260512090034.183133-1-sunshaojie@kylinos.cn>
On 2026/5/12 17:00, Sun Shaojie wrote:
> From: sunshaojie <sunshaojie@kylinos.cn>
>
> In update_parent_effective_cpumask() with partcmd_invalidate, the CPUs
> to return to the parent are computed as:
>
> adding = cpumask_and(tmp->addmask, xcpus, parent->effective_xcpus);
>
> where xcpus = user_xcpus(cs) which returns cs->exclusive_cpus (if set)
> or cs->cpus_allowed. When exclusive_cpus is not set, user_xcpus(cs) can
> contain CPUs that were never actually granted to the partition due to
> sibling exclusion in compute_excpus(). Consequently, the invalidation
> may return CPUs to the parent that remain in use by sibling partitions,
> causing overlapping effective_cpus and triggering the
> WARN_ON_ONCE(1) in generate_sched_domains().
>
> Use cs->effective_xcpus instead, which reflects the CPUs actually
> granted to this partition.
>
> Reproducer (on a 4-CPU machine):
>
> cd /sys/fs/cgroup
> mkdir a1 b1
>
> # a1 becomes partition root with CPUs 0-1
> echo "0-1" > a1/cpuset.cpus
> echo "root" > a1/cpuset.cpus.partition
>
> # b1 becomes partition root with CPUs 1-2, but sibling exclusion
> # reduces its effective_xcpus to CPU 2 only
> echo "1-2" > b1/cpuset.cpus
> echo "root" > b1/cpuset.cpus.partition
>
> # b1 changes cpus_allowed to 0-1 -> partition invalidation
> echo "0-1" > b1/cpuset.cpus
>
> # Expected: CPUs 2-3 (only CPU 2 returned from b1)
> # Actual: CPUs 1-3 (CPU 0-1 returned, overlapping with a1)
> cat cpuset.cpus.effective
>
Thank you for providing the reproducer. I was able to reproduce the issue.
#cd /sys/fs/cgroup
#mkdir a1 b1
#
#echo "0-1" > a1/cpuset.cpus
#echo "root" > a1/cpuset.cpus.partition
#echo "1-2" > b1/cpuset.cpus
#echo "root" > b1/cpuset.cpus.partition
#echo "0-1" > b1/cpuset.cpus
#cat cpuset.cpus.effective
1-3
WARNING: kernel/cgroup/cpuset.c:867 at
rebuild_sched_domains_locked+0x32c/0x510, CPU#3: bash/540
Modules linked in:
CPU: 3 UID: 0 PID: 540 Comm: bash Not tainted 7.1.0-rc2-next-20260508 #1122
PREEMPT(full)
Call Trace:
<TASK>
? kfree+0x1fb/0x540
? update_cpumasks_hier+0x34d/0xa30
cpuset_update_sd_hk_unlock+0x7b/0x90
cpuset_write_resmask+0x3f0/0xc70
kernfs_fop_write_iter+0x14c/0x200
vfs_write+0x362/0x510
ksys_write+0x6b/0xe0
do_syscall_64+0xba/0x5a0
entry_SYSCALL_64_after_hwframe+0x4b/0x53
And this patch can fix this issue.
> dmesg will also show a WARNING from generate_sched_domains() reporting
> overlapping partition root effective_cpus.
>
> Fixes: 0c7f293efc87 ("cgroup/cpuset: Add cpuset.cpus.exclusive.effective for v2")
> Signed-off-by: sunshaojie <sunshaojie@kylinos.cn>
I think the Fixes tag should point to commit 2a3602030d80 ("cgroup/cpuset: Don't
invalidate sibling partitions on cpuset.cpus conflict"). Before this commit, the
issue should not have been reproducible, since a1/b1 would have been invalidated
if they were in conflict. No warning is observed in dmesg when resetting to
commit 7cc1720589d8 ("cpuset: remove v1-specific code from generate_sched_domains").
Other than that, the patch looks good to me.
Test-by: Chen Ridong <chenridong@huaweicloud.com>
Reviewed-by: Chen Ridong <chenridong@huaweicloud.com>
> ---
> kernel/cgroup/cpuset.c | 3 ++-
> 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
>
> diff --git a/kernel/cgroup/cpuset.c b/kernel/cgroup/cpuset.c
> index 1335e437098e..2311470ef077 100644
> --- a/kernel/cgroup/cpuset.c
> +++ b/kernel/cgroup/cpuset.c
> @@ -1715,7 +1715,8 @@ static int update_parent_effective_cpumask(struct cpuset *cs, int cmd,
> */
> if (is_partition_valid(parent))
> adding = cpumask_and(tmp->addmask,
> - xcpus, parent->effective_xcpus);
> + cs->effective_xcpus,
> + parent->effective_xcpus);
> if (old_prs > 0)
> new_prs = -old_prs;
>
--
Best regards,
Ridong
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2026-05-13 6:55 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 3+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2026-05-12 9:00 Sun Shaojie
2026-05-13 6:55 ` Chen Ridong [this message]
2026-05-13 19:52 ` 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=2bcc3436-b928-4a6d-be73-d22735e972ec@huaweicloud.com \
--to=chenridong@huaweicloud.com \
--cc=cgroups@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=hannes@cmpxchg.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=longman@redhat.com \
--cc=mkoutny@suse.com \
--cc=sunshaojie@kylinos.cn \
--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®