[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <4A77E4D0.20900@cn.fujitsu.com>
Date: Tue, 04 Aug 2009 15:35:44 +0800
From: Lai Jiangshan <laijs@...fujitsu.com>
To: Oleg Nesterov <oleg@...hat.com>
CC: Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>,
Rusty Russell <rusty@...tcorp.com.au>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Li Zefan <lizf@...fujitsu.com>,
Miao Xie <miaox@...fujitsu.com>,
Paul Menage <menage@...gle.com>,
Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@...llo.nl>,
Gautham R Shenoy <ego@...ibm.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] cpusets: rework guarantee_online_cpus() to fix deadlock
with cpu_down()
Oleg Nesterov wrote:
> On 08/02, Lai Jiangshan wrote:
>> Oleg Nesterov wrote:
>>
>>> - do NOT scan cs->parent cpusets. If there are no online CPUs in
>>> cs->cpus_allowed, we use cpu_online_mask. This is only possible
>>> when we are called by cpu_down() hooks, in that case
>>> cpuset_track_online_cpus(CPU_DEAD) will fix things later.
>>>
>>
>> We must scan cs->parent cpusets.
>> A task is constrained by a cpuset,
>
> Yes, the task esacpes its cpuset. With or without this patch.
> Because cs->cpus_allowed has no online CPUs.
>
>> it must be constrained
>> this cpuset's parent too.
>
> It will be constained again, after scan_for_empty_cpusets(), no?
cpuset_cpus_allowed() is not only used for CPU offline.
sched_setaffinity() also uses it. The task will not be constained again.
Or I missed something.
Lai
--
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/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists