linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 2/2] cpusets: update tasks' cpus_allowed and mems

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: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

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

Message-Id: <20080604122227.a092e70e.pj@sgi.com>
Date:	Wed, 4 Jun 2008 12:22:27 -0500
From:	Paul Jackson <pj@....com>
To:	"Paul Menage" <menage@...gle.com>
Cc:	miaox@...fujitsu.com, akpm@...ux-foundation.org,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, rientjes@...gle.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] cpusets: update tasks' cpus_allowed and
 mems_allowed after CPU/NODE offline/online

Paul M, quoting Miao Xie <miaox@...fujitsu.com>:
>>
>> Maybe we need to add a flag in the task_struct to mark which task can't be
>> unbound?

Do we need a new PF_* flag for this?  Perhaps one can test for this
by examining the currently available properties of tasks.  Would it
be sufficient to look for kernel threads (NULL mm_struct) whose
cpus_allowed is a strict subset of the online CPUs?

-- 
                  I won't rest till it's the best ...
                  Programmer, Linux Scalability
                  Paul Jackson <pj@....com> 1.940.382.4214
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/