From: Waiman Long <longman@redhat.com>
To: "Hui Peng" <benquike@gmail.com>,
"Ridong Chen" <ridong.chen@linux.dev>,
"Guopeng Zhang" <guopeng.zhang@linux.dev>,
"Tejun Heo" <tj@kernel.org>,
"Johannes Weiner" <hannes@cmpxchg.org>,
"Michal Koutný" <mkoutny@suse.com>
Cc: Shuah Khan <shuah@kernel.org>,
Chen Ridong <chenridong@huawei.com>,
cgroups@vger.kernel.org, linux-kselftest@vger.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, stable@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 3/3] cgroup/cpuset: check sibling effective_xcpus in cpus_excl_conflict()
Date: Sun, 27 Sep 2026 19:44:02 -0400 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <90088ec5-41a6-4034-a0fd-aaafebfe1083@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20260924042729.1908863-4-benquike@gmail.com>
On 9/24/26 12:27 AM, Hui Peng wrote:
> In cpus_excl_conflict(), when a valid local partition A1 uses implicit
> exclusive CPUs (cpuset.cpus set without cpuset.cpus.exclusive, so
> sibling->exclusive_cpus is empty while sibling->effective_xcpus is
> populated), a sibling cgroup B1 can still set cpuset.cpus.exclusive on
> the same CPUs because cpus_excl_conflict() only checks
> sibling->exclusive_cpus.
>
> Fall back to sibling->effective_xcpus in cpus_excl_conflict() when
> sibling->exclusive_cpus is empty, and add a regression test case to
> tools/testing/selftests/cgroup/test_cpuset_prs.sh.
>
> Tested in QEMU on Linux 7.3.0-rc3 using
> tools/testing/selftests/cgroup/test_cpuset_prs.sh.
>
> Fixes: 2a3602030d80 ("cgroup/cpuset: Don't invalidate sibling partitions on cpuset.cpus conflict")
> Cc: stable@vger.kernel.org
> Assisted-by: LLM
> Signed-off-by: Hui Peng <benquike@gmail.com>
> ---
> kernel/cgroup/cpuset.c | 5 ++++-
> tools/testing/selftests/cgroup/test_cpuset_prs.sh | 1 +
> 2 files changed, 5 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
>
> diff --git a/kernel/cgroup/cpuset.c b/kernel/cgroup/cpuset.c
> index 7c5b4a8f1f3a..f46a51f07938 100644
> --- a/kernel/cgroup/cpuset.c
> +++ b/kernel/cgroup/cpuset.c
> @@ -713,7 +713,10 @@ static inline bool cpus_excl_conflict(struct cpuset *trial, struct cpuset *sibli
> return true;
>
> /* Exclusive_cpus cannot intersect */
> - return cpumask_intersects(trial->exclusive_cpus, sibling->exclusive_cpus);
> + return cpumask_intersects(trial->exclusive_cpus,
> + cpumask_empty(sibling->exclusive_cpus)
> + ? sibling->effective_xcpus
> + : sibling->exclusive_cpus);
> }
>
> static inline bool mems_excl_conflict(struct cpuset *cs1, struct cpuset *cs2)
> diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/cgroup/test_cpuset_prs.sh b/tools/testing/selftests/cgroup/test_cpuset_prs.sh
> index f4d1822d4e21..f62155cf6162 100755
> --- a/tools/testing/selftests/cgroup/test_cpuset_prs.sh
> +++ b/tools/testing/selftests/cgroup/test_cpuset_prs.sh
> @@ -445,6 +445,7 @@ TEST_MATRIX=(
>
> # Changes to cpuset.cpus.exclusive that violate exclusivity rule is rejected
> " C0-3 . . C4-5 X0-3 . . X3-5 1 A1:0-3|B1:4-5"
> + " C0-3:P1 . . C4-5 . . . X3-5 1 A1:0-3|B1:4-5 A1:P1|B1:P0"
>
> # cpuset.cpus.exclusive cannot be set to a superset of sibling's cpuset.cpus
> " C0-3 . . C4-5 X3-5 . . . 1 A1:0-3|B1:4-5"
Reviewed-by: Waiman Long <longman@redhat.com>
prev parent reply other threads:[~2026-09-27 23:44 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 10+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2026-09-24 4:27 [PATCH v4 0/3] cgroup/cpuset: fix exclusive CPU conflict checks for local and remote partitions Hui Peng
2026-09-24 4:27 ` [PATCH v4 1/3] cgroup/cpuset: return PERR_NOCPUS in remote_partition_enable() on subpartitions_cpus conflict Hui Peng
2026-09-25 19:22 ` Waiman Long
2026-09-26 19:11 ` Tejun Heo
2026-09-28 1:25 ` Ridong Chen
2026-09-24 4:27 ` [PATCH v4 2/3] cgroup/cpuset: prevent activating local partition over remote one Hui Peng
2026-09-27 1:45 ` Waiman Long
2026-09-28 1:40 ` Ridong Chen
2026-09-24 4:27 ` [PATCH v4 3/3] cgroup/cpuset: check sibling effective_xcpus in cpus_excl_conflict() Hui Peng
2026-09-27 23:44 ` Waiman Long [this message]
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=90088ec5-41a6-4034-a0fd-aaafebfe1083@redhat.com \
--to=longman@redhat.com \
--cc=benquike@gmail.com \
--cc=cgroups@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=chenridong@huawei.com \
--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=stable@vger.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®