[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20200312182618.GE79873@mtj.duckdns.org>
Date: Thu, 12 Mar 2020 14:26:19 -0400
From: Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>
To: Mathieu Desnoyers <mathieu.desnoyers@...icios.com>
Cc: Li Zefan <lizefan@...wei.com>, cgroups <cgroups@...r.kernel.org>,
linux-kernel <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>,
Valentin Schneider <valentin.schneider@....com>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>
Subject: Re: [regression] cpuset: offlined CPUs removed from affinity masks
Hello,
On Sat, Mar 07, 2020 at 11:06:47AM -0500, Mathieu Desnoyers wrote:
> Looking into solving this, one key issue seems to get in the way: cpuset
> appear to care about not allowing to create a cpuset which has no currently
> active CPU where to run, e.g.:
...
> Clearly, there is an intent that cpusets take the active mask into
> account to prohibit creating an empty cpuset, but nothing prevents
> cpu hotplug from creating an empty cpuset.
>
> I wonder how to solve this inconsistency ?
Please try cpuset in cgroup2. It shouldn't have those issues.
Thanks.
--
tejun
Powered by blists - more mailing lists