[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <YaelRiqWOIzT5uRs@slm.duckdns.org>
Date: Wed, 1 Dec 2021 06:39:34 -1000
From: Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>
To: Waiman Long <longman@...hat.com>
Cc: Michal Koutný <mkoutny@...e.com>,
Zefan Li <lizefan.x@...edance.com>,
Johannes Weiner <hannes@...xchg.org>,
Jonathan Corbet <corbet@....net>,
Shuah Khan <shuah@...nel.org>, cgroups@...r.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-doc@...r.kernel.org,
linux-kselftest@...r.kernel.org,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
Roman Gushchin <guro@...com>, Phil Auld <pauld@...hat.com>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
Juri Lelli <juri.lelli@...hat.com>,
Frederic Weisbecker <frederic@...nel.org>,
Marcelo Tosatti <mtosatti@...hat.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v8 5/6] cgroup/cpuset: Update description of
cpuset.cpus.partition in cgroup-v2.rst
On Wed, Dec 01, 2021 at 09:56:21AM -0500, Waiman Long wrote:
> Right, I shouldn't say corner cases. Having task in an intermediate
> partition is possible depending on event sequence. I am aware that there are
> code in the cpuset code to prevent that, but it didn't block all cases.
> > > A valid parent partition may distribute out all its CPUs to
> > > its child partitions as long as there is no task associated with it.
> > Assuming there's always at least one kernel thread in the root cgroup
> > that can't be migrated anyway.]
>
> I am aware of that. That is why I said root cgroup must have at least one
> cpu in its "cpuset.cpus.effective".
In that case, let's explicitly describe that condition.
Thanks.
--
tejun
Powered by blists - more mailing lists