[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20211215103629.GA25459@blackbody.suse.cz>
Date: Wed, 15 Dec 2021 11:36:29 +0100
From: Michal Koutný <mkoutny@...e.com>
To: Waiman Long <longman@...hat.com>
Cc: Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>, 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 v9 2/7] cgroup/cpuset: Allow no-task partition to have
empty cpuset.cpus.effective
On Tue, Dec 14, 2021 at 10:24:22PM -0500, Waiman Long <longman@...hat.com> wrote:
> AFAICS, there are code in cpuset.c that disallows the an non-child node to
> hold tasks, but the check doesn't cover all the possible cases.
> I remembered that I was able to create such a scenario without using
> threaded domains.
On the default hierarchy (with controller(s) enabled)? That sounds like a bug.
> That is why I put in this conditional check. It has nothing to do with the
> use of threaded domains.
But threaded domains are important nevertheless.
I think that a structure like
app-cgroup cgroup.type=threaded domain cpuset.partition=root
`- rt cgroup.type=threaded cpuset.partition=isolated
`- normal cgroup.type=threaded
is a valid use case. Therefore I would not disallow partitioning inside
threaded subtrees (as suggested).
Michal
Powered by blists - more mailing lists