linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 17/33] cpuset: Propagate cpuset isolation update to workqueue through housekeeping

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: <aNFm6ZhhPpRrguyS@2a01cb069018a81087c6c9b3bf9471d3.ipv6.abo.wanadoo.fr>
Date: Mon, 22 Sep 2025 17:10:33 +0200
From: Frederic Weisbecker <frederic@...nel.org>
To: Waiman Long <llong@...hat.com>
Cc: LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	Michal Koutný <mkoutny@...e.com>,
	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>,
	Johannes Weiner <hannes@...xchg.org>,
	Lai Jiangshan <jiangshanlai@...il.com>,
	Marco Crivellari <marco.crivellari@...e.com>,
	Michal Hocko <mhocko@...e.com>,
	Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>, Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>,
	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
	Vlastimil Babka <vbabka@...e.cz>, cgroups@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 17/33] cpuset: Propagate cpuset isolation update to
 workqueue through housekeeping

Le Sun, Aug 31, 2025 at 10:51:27PM -0400, Waiman Long a écrit :
> 
> On 8/29/25 11:47 AM, Frederic Weisbecker wrote:
> > --- a/kernel/sched/isolation.c
> > +++ b/kernel/sched/isolation.c
> > @@ -102,6 +102,7 @@ EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(housekeeping_test_cpu);
> >   int housekeeping_update(struct cpumask *mask, enum hk_type type)
> >   {
> >   	struct cpumask *trial, *old = NULL;
> > +	int err;
> >   	if (type != HK_TYPE_DOMAIN)
> >   		return -ENOTSUPP;
> > @@ -126,10 +127,11 @@ int housekeeping_update(struct cpumask *mask, enum hk_type type)
> >   	mem_cgroup_flush_workqueue();
> >   	vmstat_flush_workqueue();
> > +	err = workqueue_unbound_exclude_cpumask(housekeeping_cpumask(type));
> >   	kfree(old);
> > -	return 0;
> > +	return err;
> >   }
> 
> Actually workqueue_unbound_exclude_cpumask() expects a cpumask of all the
> CPUs that have been isolated. IOW, all the CPUs that are not in
> housekeeping_cpumask(HK_TYPE_DOMAIN). So we do the inversion here or we
> rename the function to, e.g. workqueue_unbound_cpumask_update() and make the
> change there.

Whoops! Thanks for noticing this.

Thanks.

> Cheers,
> Longman
> 

-- 
Frederic Weisbecker
SUSE Labs