linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v8 4/6] cpuset: Make generate_sched_domains() recognize isolated

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:   Tue, 29 May 2018 08:27:03 +0200
From:   Juri Lelli <juri.lelli@...hat.com>
To:     Waiman Long <longman@...hat.com>
Cc:     Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>, Li Zefan <lizefan@...wei.com>,
        Johannes Weiner <hannes@...xchg.org>,
        Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
        Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>, cgroups@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-doc@...r.kernel.org,
        kernel-team@...com, pjt@...gle.com, luto@...capital.net,
        Mike Galbraith <efault@....de>, torvalds@...ux-foundation.org,
        Roman Gushchin <guro@...com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v8 4/6] cpuset: Make generate_sched_domains() recognize
 isolated_cpus

On 28/05/18 21:24, Waiman Long wrote:
> On 05/28/2018 09:12 PM, Waiman Long wrote:
> > On 05/24/2018 06:28 AM, Juri Lelli wrote:
> >> On 17/05/18 16:55, Waiman Long wrote:
> >>
> >> [...]
> >>
> >>> @@ -849,7 +860,12 @@ static void rebuild_sched_domains_locked(void)
> >>>  	 * passing doms with offlined cpu to partition_sched_domains().
> >>>  	 * Anyways, hotplug work item will rebuild sched domains.
> >>>  	 */
> >>> -	if (!cpumask_equal(top_cpuset.effective_cpus, cpu_active_mask))
> >>> +	if (!top_cpuset.isolation_count &&
> >>> +	    !cpumask_equal(top_cpuset.effective_cpus, cpu_active_mask))
> >>> +		goto out;
> >>> +
> >>> +	if (top_cpuset.isolation_count &&
> >>> +	   !cpumask_subset(top_cpuset.effective_cpus, cpu_active_mask))
> >>>  		goto out;
> >> Do we cover the case in which hotplug removed one of the isolated cpus
> >> from cpu_active_mask?
> > Yes, you are right. That is the remnant of my original patch that allows
> > only one isolated_cpus at root. Thanks for spotting that.
> 
> I am sorry. I would like to take it back my previous comment. The code
> above looks for inconsistency in the state of the effective_cpus mask to
> find out if it is racing with a hotplug event. If it is, we can skip the
> domain generation as the hotplug event will do that too. The checks are
> still valid with the current patchset. So I don't think we need to make
> any change here.

Yes, these checks are valid, but don't we also need to check for hotplug
races w.r.t. isolated CPUs (of some other sub domain)?