mirror of https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Chen Ridong <chenridong@huaweicloud.com>
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: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, cgroups@vger.kernel.org,
	linux-kselftest@vger.kernel.org,
	Sun Shaojie <sunshaojie@kylinos.cn>
Subject: Re: [cgroup/for-6.20 PATCH 1/4] cgroup/cpuset: Streamline rm_siblings_excl_cpus()
Date: Thu, 25 Dec 2025 17:27:34 +0800	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <c75025d3-17cd-47bb-a222-bde3a156bbbb@huaweicloud.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20251225073056.30789-2-longman@redhat.com>



On 2025/12/25 15:30, Waiman Long wrote:
> If exclusive_cpus is set, effective_xcpus must be a subset of
> exclusive_cpus. Currently, rm_siblings_excl_cpus() checks both
> exclusive_cpus and effective_xcpus connectively. It is simpler
> to check only exclusive_cpus if non-empty or just effective_xcpus
> otherwise.
> 
> No functional change is expected.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Waiman Long <longman@redhat.com>
> ---
>  kernel/cgroup/cpuset.c | 17 +++++++++--------
>  1 file changed, 9 insertions(+), 8 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/kernel/cgroup/cpuset.c b/kernel/cgroup/cpuset.c
> index 221da921b4f9..3d2d28f0fd03 100644
> --- a/kernel/cgroup/cpuset.c
> +++ b/kernel/cgroup/cpuset.c
> @@ -1355,23 +1355,24 @@ static int rm_siblings_excl_cpus(struct cpuset *parent, struct cpuset *cs,
>  	int retval = 0;
>  
>  	if (cpumask_empty(excpus))
> -		return retval;
> +		return 0;
>  
>  	/*
>  	 * Exclude exclusive CPUs from siblings
>  	 */
>  	rcu_read_lock();
>  	cpuset_for_each_child(sibling, css, parent) {
> +		struct cpumask *sibling_xcpus;
> +
>  		if (sibling == cs)
>  			continue;
>  
> -		if (cpumask_intersects(excpus, sibling->exclusive_cpus)) {
> -			cpumask_andnot(excpus, excpus, sibling->exclusive_cpus);
> -			retval++;
> -			continue;
> -		}
> -		if (cpumask_intersects(excpus, sibling->effective_xcpus)) {
> -			cpumask_andnot(excpus, excpus, sibling->effective_xcpus);
> +		sibling_xcpus = cpumask_empty(sibling->exclusive_cpus)
> +			      ? sibling->effective_xcpus
> +			      : sibling->exclusive_cpus;
> +

I'm wondering if this is sufficient?

sibling_xcpus = sibling->effective_xcpus

      p(exclusive_cpus = 1)
   /	  \
 a	b(root, exclusive_cpus=1-7, effective_xcpus=1)

What the sibling's effective exclusive CPUs actually should be is not CPUs 1-7 but CPU 1. So, do we
need to remove CPUs 2-7?

> +		if (cpumask_intersects(excpus, sibling_xcpus)) {
> +			cpumask_andnot(excpus, excpus, sibling_xcpus);
>  			retval++;
>  		}
>  	}

-- 
Best regards,
Ridong


  reply	other threads:[~2025-12-25  9:27 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 14+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2025-12-25  7:30 [cgroup/for-6.20 PATCH 0/4] cgroup/cpuset: Don't invalidate sibling partitions on cpuset.cpus conflict Waiman Long
2025-12-25  7:30 ` [cgroup/for-6.20 PATCH 1/4] cgroup/cpuset: Streamline rm_siblings_excl_cpus() Waiman Long
2025-12-25  9:27   ` Chen Ridong [this message]
2025-12-27  7:40     ` Waiman Long
2025-12-27 10:14       ` Chen Ridong
2025-12-25  7:30 ` [cgroup/for-6.20 PATCH 2/4] cgroup/cpuset: Consistently compute effective_xcpus in update_cpumasks_hier() Waiman Long
2025-12-27 10:10   ` Chen Ridong
2025-12-25  7:30 ` [cgroup/for-6.20 PATCH 3/4] cgroup/cpuset: Don't fail cpuset.cpus change in v2 Waiman Long
2025-12-25  9:30   ` Chen Ridong
2025-12-27  7:42     ` Waiman Long
2025-12-25 11:54   ` Chen Ridong
2025-12-27  8:03     ` Waiman Long
2025-12-25  7:30 ` [cgroup/for-6.20 PATCH 4/4] cgroup/cpuset: Don't invalidate sibling partitions on cpuset.cpus conflict Waiman Long
2025-12-29 12:42 ` [cgroup/for-6.20 PATCH 0/4] " Sun Shaojie

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=c75025d3-17cd-47bb-a222-bde3a156bbbb@huaweicloud.com \
    --to=chenridong@huaweicloud.com \
    --cc=cgroups@vger.kernel.org \
    --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=shuah@kernel.org \
    --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®