linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] cpuset: Enforce that a child's cpus must be a subset of the parent

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]

Message-ID: <5B0FAE72.1090204@huawei.com>
Date:   Thu, 31 May 2018 16:12:34 +0800
From:   Zefan Li <lizefan@...wei.com>
To:     Waiman Long <longman@...hat.com>, Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>,
        "Johannes Weiner" <hannes@...xchg.org>,
        Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
        "Ingo Molnar" <mingo@...hat.com>
CC:     <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>,
        Juri Lelli <juri.lelli@...hat.com>,
        Patrick Bellasi <patrick.bellasi@....com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] cpuset: Enforce that a child's cpus must be a subset of
 the parent

On 2018/5/31 9:25, Zefan Li wrote:
> Hi Waiman,
> 
> On 2018/5/30 21:46, Waiman Long wrote:
>> It was found that the cpuset.cpus could contain CPUs that are not listed
>> in their parent's cpu list as shown by the command sequence below:
>>
>>   # echo "+cpuset" >cgroup.subtree_control
>>   # mkdir g1
>>   # echo 0-5 >g1/cpuset.cpus
>>   # mkdir g1/g11
>>   # echo "+cpuset" > g1/cgroup.subtree_control
>>   # echo 6-11 >g1/g11/cpuset.cpus
>>   # grep -R . g1 | grep "\.cpus"
>>   g1/cpuset.cpus:0-5
>>   g1/cpuset.cpus.effective:0-5
>>   g1/g11/cpuset.cpus:6-11
>>   g1/g11/cpuset.cpus.effective:0-5
>>
>> As the intersection of g11's cpus and that of g1 is empty, the effective
>> cpus of g11 is just that of g1. The check in update_cpumask() is now
>> corrected to make sure that cpus in a child cpus must be a subset of
>> its parent's cpus. The error "write error: Invalid argument" will now
>> be reported in the above case.
>>
> 
> We made the distinction between user-configured CPUs and effective CPUs
> in commit 7e88291beefbb758, so actually it's not a bug.
> 

I remember the original reason is to support restoration of the original
cpu after cpu offline->online. We use user-configured CPUs to remember
if the cpu should be restored in the cpuset after it's onlined.