Re: [PATCH v2] sched/core: Use empty mask to reset cpumasks in sched_setaffinity()

[Waiman Long <longman@redhat.com>]

On 7/21/23 05:42, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> On Mon, Jul 17, 2023 at 02:02:43PM -0400, Waiman Long wrote:
>> Since commit 8f9ea86fdf99 ("sched: Always preserve the user requested
>> cpumask"), user provided CPU affinity via sched_setaffinity(2) is
>> perserved even if the task is being moved to a different cpuset. However,
>> that affinity is also being inherited by any subsequently created child
>> processes which may not want or be aware of that affinity.
>>
>> One way to solve this problem is to provide a way to back off from
>> that user provided CPU affinity.  This patch implements such a scheme
>> by using an empty cpumask to signal a reset of the cpumasks to the
>> default as allowed by the current cpuset.
>>
>> Before this patch, passing in an empty cpumask to sched_setaffinity(2)
>> will always return an EINVAL error. With this patch, an error will no
>> longer be returned if sched_setaffinity(2) has been called before to
>> set up user_cpus_ptr. Instead, the user_cpus_ptr that stores the user
>> provided affinity will be cleared and the task's CPU affinity will be
>> reset to that of the current cpuset. No error will be returned in this
>> case to signal that a reset has happened.
>>
>> If sched_setaffinity(2) has not been called previously, an EINVAL error
>> will be returned with an empty cpumask just like before. As a result,
>> tests or tools that rely on this behavior will not be affected unless
>> they have somehow called sched_setaffinity(2) before.
>>
>> We will have to update the sched_setaffinity(2) manpage to document
>> this possible side effect of passing in an empty cpumask.
> So a normal task, that hasn't had it's affinity changed will have
> possible_mask.
>
> So why not use in_mask == possible_mask to clear the user state?

It is not straight forward for a user application to figure what exactly 
is possible_mask. Using a empty mask, however, is much easier with the 
CPU_ZERO() macro.

In many cases, tasks may be running under a cpuset with cpu list that is 
a proper subset of possible_mask. Since possible_mask is a valid 
cpumask, we can't use it to reset to the cpuset's default which is what 
this patch is.

Cheers,
Longman