mirror of https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Waiman Long <longman@redhat.com>
To: "Sun Shaojie" <sunshaojie@kylinos.cn>,
	"Chen Ridong" <chenridong@huaweicloud.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,
	zhangguopeng@kylinos.cn
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 1/2] cgroup/cpuset: Use effective_xcpus in partcmd_update add/del mask calculation
Date: Wed, 27 May 2026 14:01:14 -0400	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <62837b91-b820-4dc1-9f12-6206b30ab7d2@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20260527064329.640060-2-sunshaojie@kylinos.cn>

On 5/27/26 2:43 AM, Sun Shaojie wrote:
> When sibling CPU exclusion occurs, a partition's user_xcpus may contain
> CPUs that were never actually granted to it. These CPUs are present in
> user_xcpus(cs) but not in cs->effective_xcpus.
>
> The partcmd_update path in update_parent_effective_cpumask() uses
> user_xcpus(cs) (via the local variable xcpus) to compute the addmask
> (CPUs to return to parent) and delmask (CPUs to request from parent).
> This is incorrect:
>
>   1) When newmask removes a CPU that was previously excluded by a
>      sibling, addmask incorrectly includes that CPU and tries to return
>      it to the parent even though the partition never actually owned it,
>      causing CPU overlap with sibling partitions and triggering warnings
>      in generate_sched_domains().
>
>   2) When newmask adds a previously excluded CPU that is now available,
>      delmask fails to request it from the parent because user_xcpus(cs)
>      already includes it.
>
> Fix this by using cs->effective_xcpus instead of user_xcpus(cs) in all
> partcmd_update paths that calculate addmask or delmask, including the
> PERR_NOCPUS error handling paths.
>
> Reproducers:
>
>    Example 1 - Removing a sibling-excluded CPU incorrectly returns it:
>
>      # cd /sys/fs/cgroup
>      # echo "0-1" > a1/cpuset.cpus
>      # echo "root" > a1/cpuset.cpus.partition
>      # echo "0-2" > b1/cpuset.cpus
>      # echo "root" > b1/cpuset.cpus.partition
>      # echo "2" > b1/cpuset.cpus
>      # cat cpuset.cpus.effective
>      # Actual: 0-1,3    Expected: 3
>
>    Example 2 - Expanding to a previously excluded CPU fails to request it:
>
>      # cd /sys/fs/cgroup
>      # echo "0-1" > a1/cpuset.cpus
>      # echo "root" > a1/cpuset.cpus.partition
>      # echo "0-2" > b1/cpuset.cpus
>      # echo "root" > b1/cpuset.cpus.partition
>      # echo "member" > a1/cpuset.cpus.partition
>      # echo "1-2" > b1/cpuset.cpus
>      # cat cpuset.cpus.effective
>      # Actual: 0-1,3    Expected: 0,3
>
> Fixes: 2a3602030d80 ("cgroup/cpuset: Don't invalidate sibling partitions on cpuset.cpus conflict")
> Suggested-by: Zhang Guopeng <zhangguopeng@kylinos.cn>
> Signed-off-by: Sun Shaojie <sunshaojie@kylinos.cn>
> ---
>   kernel/cgroup/cpuset.c | 13 +++++++------
>   1 file changed, 7 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/kernel/cgroup/cpuset.c b/kernel/cgroup/cpuset.c
> index 1335e437098e..2395c5aec871 100644
> --- a/kernel/cgroup/cpuset.c
> +++ b/kernel/cgroup/cpuset.c
> @@ -1807,9 +1807,9 @@ static int update_parent_effective_cpumask(struct cpuset *cs, int cmd,
>   		 * Compute add/delete mask to/from effective_cpus
>   		 *
>   		 * For valid partition:
> -		 *   addmask = exclusive_cpus & ~newmask
> +		 *   addmask = effective_xcpus & ~newmask
>   		 *			      & parent->effective_xcpus
> -		 *   delmask = newmask & ~exclusive_cpus
> +		 *   delmask = newmask & ~effective_xcpus
>   		 *		       & parent->effective_xcpus
>   		 *
>   		 * For invalid partition:
> @@ -1821,11 +1821,11 @@ static int update_parent_effective_cpumask(struct cpuset *cs, int cmd,
>   			deleting = cpumask_and(tmp->delmask,
>   					newmask, parent->effective_xcpus);
>   		} else {
> -			cpumask_andnot(tmp->addmask, xcpus, newmask);
> +			cpumask_andnot(tmp->addmask, cs->effective_xcpus, newmask);
>   			adding = cpumask_and(tmp->addmask, tmp->addmask,
>   					     parent->effective_xcpus);
>   
> -			cpumask_andnot(tmp->delmask, newmask, xcpus);
> +			cpumask_andnot(tmp->delmask, newmask, cs->effective_xcpus);
>   			deleting = cpumask_and(tmp->delmask, tmp->delmask,
>   					       parent->effective_xcpus);
>   		}
> @@ -1864,7 +1864,7 @@ static int update_parent_effective_cpumask(struct cpuset *cs, int cmd,
>   			part_error = PERR_NOCPUS;
>   			deleting = false;
>   			adding = cpumask_and(tmp->addmask,
> -					     xcpus, parent->effective_xcpus);
> +					     cs->effective_xcpus, parent->effective_xcpus);
>   		}
>   	} else {
>   		/*
> @@ -1886,7 +1886,8 @@ static int update_parent_effective_cpumask(struct cpuset *cs, int cmd,
>   			part_error = PERR_NOCPUS;
>   			if (is_partition_valid(cs))
>   				adding = cpumask_and(tmp->addmask,
> -						xcpus, parent->effective_xcpus);
> +						     cs->effective_xcpus,
> +						     parent->effective_xcpus);
>   		} else if (is_partition_invalid(cs) && !cpumask_empty(xcpus) &&
>   			   cpumask_subset(xcpus, parent->effective_xcpus)) {
>   			struct cgroup_subsys_state *css;
Reviewed-by: Waiman Long <longman@redhat.com>


  parent reply	other threads:[~2026-05-27 18:01 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 6+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2026-05-27  6:43 [PATCH v2 0/2] cgroup/cpuset: Fix sibling CPU exclusion in partcmd_update Sun Shaojie
2026-05-27  6:43 ` [PATCH v2 1/2] cgroup/cpuset: Use effective_xcpus in partcmd_update add/del mask calculation Sun Shaojie
2026-05-27  7:05   ` [PATCH v2 2/2] cgroup/cpuset: Add test cases for sibling CPU exclusion on partition update Sun Shaojie
2026-05-27 18:08     ` Waiman Long
2026-05-27 18:01   ` Waiman Long [this message]
2026-05-27 19:05 ` [PATCH v2 0/2] cgroup/cpuset: Fix sibling CPU exclusion in partcmd_update 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=62837b91-b820-4dc1-9f12-6206b30ab7d2@redhat.com \
    --to=longman@redhat.com \
    --cc=cgroups@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=chenridong@huaweicloud.com \
    --cc=hannes@cmpxchg.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=mkoutny@suse.com \
    --cc=sunshaojie@kylinos.cn \
    --cc=tj@kernel.org \
    --cc=zhangguopeng@kylinos.cn \
    /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®