From: Ridong Chen <ridong.chen@linux.dev>
To: "Waiman Long" <longman@redhat.com>, "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,
Guopeng Zhang <guopeng.zhang@linux.dev>,
Sashiko <sashiko-bot@kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH-next v2 3/5] cgroup/cpuset: Fix incorrect partition invalidation logic in cpuset_hotplug_update_tasks()
Date: Tue, 10 Nov 2026 16:51:55 +0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <44ae3718-5ed2-48a2-94ce-5068d71d6cee@linux.dev> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20261109190955.1398611-4-longman@redhat.com>
On 11/10/2026 3:09 AM, Waiman Long wrote:
> When most of the active CPUs of a system are allocated to
> sub-partitions below the top_cpuset partition, it is possible that a
> CPU offline operation may remove the last active CPU in the top_cpuset
> partition. When that really happens, cpuset_handle_hotplug() will clear
> the subpartitions_cpus to make sure active CPUs are present in the top
> partition and let the other sub-partitions get invalidated and then
> competes for their exclusive CPUs again.
>
> In cpuset_hotplug_update_tasks(), the current code use
> "cpumask_empty(subpartitions_cpus)" to determine if that partition
> should be invalidated. That is fine if there is only one sub-partition.
> As reported by sashiko that when there are more than one sub-partitions
> and the first sub-partition will get invalidated and then it will
> try to acquire the exclusive CPUs and become valid again. When this
> happens, the subpartitions_cpus will no longer be empty. The remaining
> sub-partitions will assume their exclusive CPUs are safe and proceed
> as normal. As a result, active CPUs owned by those sub-partitions
> remain in both top_cpuset.effective_cpus and the sub-partitions'
> effective_cpus while missing from subpartitions_cpus, breaking partition
> CPU exclusivity and triggering WARN_ON_ONCE() in generate_sched_domains()
> and remote_partition_disable().
>
> Fix that by checking if the sub-partitions' effective_xcpus are subset
> of subpartitions_cpus to determine if they should be invalidated. Also
> remove the obsolete WARN_ON_ONCE() call in remote_partition_disable().
>
> Fixes: 0c7f293efc87 ("cgroup/cpuset: Add cpuset.cpus.exclusive.effective for v2")
> Reported-by: Sashiko <sashiko-bot@kernel.org>
> Link: https://sashiko.dev/#/bug/linux-bf69cd3c-833a-4599-a1f9-8dd9e044cd7c
> Signed-off-by: Waiman Long <longman@redhat.com>
> ---
> kernel/cgroup/cpuset.c | 19 +++++--------------
> 1 file changed, 5 insertions(+), 14 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/kernel/cgroup/cpuset.c b/kernel/cgroup/cpuset.c
> index 3955d2d574cf..e9b84671af21 100644
> --- a/kernel/cgroup/cpuset.c
> +++ b/kernel/cgroup/cpuset.c
> @@ -1766,15 +1766,6 @@ static int remote_partition_enable(struct cpuset *cs, int new_prs,
> static void remote_partition_disable(struct cpuset *cs, struct tmpmasks *tmp)
> {
> WARN_ON_ONCE(!is_remote_partition(cs));
> - /*
> - * When a CPU is offlined, top_cpuset may end up with no available CPUs,
> - * which should clear subpartitions_cpus. We should not emit a warning for this
> - * scenario: the hierarchy is updated from top to bottom, so subpartitions_cpus
> - * may already be cleared when disabling the partition.
> - */
> - WARN_ON_ONCE(!cpumask_subset(cs->effective_xcpus, subpartitions_cpus) &&
> - !cpumask_empty(subpartitions_cpus));
> -
> spin_lock_irq(&callback_lock);
> cs->remote_partition = false;
> partition_xcpus_del(cs->partition_root_state, NULL, cs->effective_xcpus);
> @@ -4020,9 +4011,9 @@ static void cpuset_hotplug_update_tasks(struct cpuset *cs, struct tmpmasks *tmp)
> * or update_parent_effective_cpumask() is called as cs->effective_cpus
> * may have been updated.
> */
> - if (is_remote_partition(cs) && (cpumask_empty(subpartitions_cpus) ||
> - (cpumask_empty(&new_cpus) &&
> - partition_is_populated(cs, NULL)))) {
> + if (is_remote_partition(cs) &&
> + (!cpumask_subset(cs->effective_xcpus, subpartitions_cpus) ||
> + (cpumask_empty(&new_cpus) && partition_is_populated(cs, NULL)))) {
> WRITE_ONCE(cs->prs_err, PERR_HOTPLUG);
> remote_partition_disable(cs, tmp);
> compute_effective_cpumask(&new_cpus, cs, parent);
> @@ -4035,12 +4026,12 @@ static void cpuset_hotplug_update_tasks(struct cpuset *cs, struct tmpmasks *tmp)
> * 1) empty effective cpus but not valid empty partition.
> * 2) parent is invalid or doesn't grant any cpus to child
> * partitions.
> - * 3) subpartitions_cpus is empty.
> + * 3) effective_xcpus isn't a subset of subpartitions_cpus.
> */
> if (is_local_partition(cs) &&
> (!is_partition_valid(parent) ||
> tasks_nocpu_error(parent, cs, &new_cpus) ||
> - cpumask_empty(subpartitions_cpus)))
> + !cpumask_subset(cs->effective_xcpus, subpartitions_cpus)))
> partcmd = partcmd_invalidate;
> /*
> * On the other hand, an invalid partition root may be transitioned
LGTM.
Reviewed-by: Ridong Chen <ridong.chen@linux.dev>
Thanks.
--
Best regards
Ridong
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2026-11-10 8:52 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 11+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2026-11-09 19:09 [PATCH-next v2 0/5] More fix patches Waiman Long
2026-11-09 19:09 ` [PATCH-next v2 1/5] selftests/cgroup: Fix "test_cpuset_prs.sh -v" failures Waiman Long
2026-11-10 7:56 ` Ridong Chen
2026-11-09 19:09 ` [PATCH-next v2 2/5] cgroup/cpuset: Correctly set cpus_updated in cpuset_hotplug_update_tasks() Waiman Long
2026-11-10 8:40 ` Ridong Chen
2026-11-09 19:09 ` [PATCH-next v2 3/5] cgroup/cpuset: Fix incorrect partition invalidation logic " Waiman Long
2026-11-10 8:51 ` Ridong Chen [this message]
2026-11-09 19:09 ` [PATCH-next v2 4/5] cgroup/cpuset: Protect current->mems_allowed read in cpuset_fork() Waiman Long
2026-11-09 19:09 ` [PATCH-next v2 5/5] cgroup/cpuset: Correctly set isolated_cpus when switching partition state Waiman Long
2026-11-10 2:23 ` Waiman Long
2026-11-10 2:24 ` [PATCH-next v2.1 " 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=44ae3718-5ed2-48a2-94ce-5068d71d6cee@linux.dev \
--to=ridong.chen@linux.dev \
--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=longman@redhat.com \
--cc=mkoutny@suse.com \
--cc=sashiko-bot@kernel.org \
--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®