[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20181106113712.GL22431@hirez.programming.kicks-ass.net>
Date: Tue, 6 Nov 2018 12:37:12 +0100
From: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
To: Waiman Long <longman@...hat.com>
Cc: Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>, Li Zefan <lizefan@...wei.com>,
Johannes Weiner <hannes@...xchg.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>,
Juri Lelli <juri.lelli@...hat.com>,
Patrick Bellasi <patrick.bellasi@....com>,
Tom Hromatka <tom.hromatka@...cle.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v14 05/12] cpuset: Add an error state to
cpuset.sched.partition
On Mon, Oct 15, 2018 at 04:29:30PM -0400, Waiman Long wrote:
> Handling error returned by update_parent_subparts_cpumask() in
> update_cpumasks_hier() is problematic as the states may become
> inconsistent. To avoid that and increase flexibility in handling other
> error cases, a new error state (-1) is added to the partition_root_state
> flag. This new error state is set internally and user cannot write this
> value to "cpuset.sched.partition".
>
> In this error state, the partition root becomes an erroneous one. It is
> no longer a real partition root, but the CS_CPU_EXCLUSIVE flag will
> still be set as it can be changed back to a real one if appropriate
> change happens later on.
I feel this Changelog should be much more explicit about the reasons
this -1 state can happen. As is, I've got no clue.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists