linux-kernel - [PATCH 2/3] cgroup/cpuset: Make cpuset_attach_task() skip subpartitions CPUs for top

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: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-Id: <20230331145045.2251683-3-longman@redhat.com>
Date:   Fri, 31 Mar 2023 10:50:44 -0400
From:   Waiman Long <longman@...hat.com>
To:     Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>, Zefan Li <lizefan.x@...edance.com>,
        Johannes Weiner <hannes@...xchg.org>,
        Christian Brauner <brauner@...nel.org>
Cc:     cgroups@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        Juri Lelli <juri.lelli@...hat.com>,
        Dietmar Eggemann <dietmar.eggemann@....com>,
        gscrivan@...hat.com, Waiman Long <longman@...hat.com>
Subject: [PATCH 2/3] cgroup/cpuset: Make cpuset_attach_task() skip subpartitions CPUs for top_cpuset

It is found that attaching a task to the top_cpuset does not currently
ignore CPUs allocated to subpartitions in cpuset_attach_task(). So the
code is changed to fix that.

Signed-off-by: Waiman Long <longman@...hat.com>
---
 kernel/cgroup/cpuset.c | 3 ++-
 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)

diff --git a/kernel/cgroup/cpuset.c b/kernel/cgroup/cpuset.c
index f6d5614982d7..2367de611c42 100644
--- a/kernel/cgroup/cpuset.c
+++ b/kernel/cgroup/cpuset.c
@@ -2530,7 +2530,8 @@ static void cpuset_attach_task(struct cpuset *cs, struct task_struct *task)
 	if (cs != &top_cpuset)
 		guarantee_online_cpus(task, cpus_attach);
 	else
-		cpumask_copy(cpus_attach, task_cpu_possible_mask(task));
+		cpumask_andnot(cpus_attach, task_cpu_possible_mask(task),
+			       cs->subparts_cpus);
 	/*
 	 * can_attach beforehand should guarantee that this doesn't
 	 * fail.  TODO: have a better way to handle failure here
-- 
2.31.1