linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] cgroup/cpuset: Don't filter offline CPUs in cpuset_cpus

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]

Date:   Mon, 6 Feb 2023 10:17:05 -1000
From:   Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>
To:     Will Deacon <will@...nel.org>
Cc:     Waiman Long <longman@...hat.com>,
        Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
        Zefan Li <lizefan.x@...edance.com>,
        Johannes Weiner <hannes@...xchg.org>,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, cgroups@...r.kernel.org,
        kernel-team@...roid.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH] cgroup/cpuset: Don't filter offline CPUs in
 cpuset_cpus_allowed() for top cpuset tasks

Hello,

On Mon, Feb 06, 2023 at 11:05:41AM +0000, Will Deacon wrote:
> > If we want to get it into the next merge windows, there isn't much time left
> > for linux-next testing. So a lower risk solution is better from that
> > perspective too.
> 
> This needs to land for 6.2 to fix the regression. The next merge window is
> too late. That's why I cooked the reverts [1] as an alternative.

Yeah, I think Waiman meant before the coming merge window. We have at least
one more week so let's try the two patches and see how that goes. We can
always revert if it doesn't work out.

Thanks.

-- 
tejun