[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <1fff6bd2-b62a-48d9-9408-af3b5552815e@huaweicloud.com>
Date: Wed, 4 Feb 2026 10:51:45 +0800
From: Chen Ridong <chenridong@...weicloud.com>
To: Waiman Long <longman@...hat.com>, Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>,
Johannes Weiner <hannes@...xchg.org>, Michal Koutný
<mkoutny@...e.com>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>, Juri Lelli <juri.lelli@...hat.com>,
Vincent Guittot <vincent.guittot@...aro.org>,
Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>, Ben Segall <bsegall@...gle.com>,
Mel Gorman <mgorman@...e.de>, Valentin Schneider <vschneid@...hat.com>,
Anna-Maria Behnsen <anna-maria@...utronix.de>,
Frederic Weisbecker <frederic@...nel.org>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>, Shuah Khan <shuah@...nel.org>
Cc: cgroups@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
linux-kselftest@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH/for-next v3 3/3] cgroup/cpuset: Call housekeeping_update()
without holding cpus_read_lock
On 2026/2/3 4:11, Waiman Long wrote:
> --- a/kernel/time/timer_migration.c
> +++ b/kernel/time/timer_migration.c
> @@ -1559,8 +1559,6 @@ int tmigr_isolated_exclude_cpumask(struct cpumask *exclude_cpumask)
> cpumask_var_t cpumask __free(free_cpumask_var) = CPUMASK_VAR_NULL;
> int cpu;
>
> - lockdep_assert_cpus_held();
> -
> if (!works)
> return -ENOMEM;
> if (!alloc_cpumask_var(&cpumask, GFP_KERNEL))
> @@ -1570,6 +1568,7 @@ int tmigr_isolated_exclude_cpumask(struct cpumask *exclude_cpumask)
> * First set previously isolated CPUs as available (unisolate).
> * This cpumask contains only CPUs that switched to available now.
> */
> + guard(cpus_read_lock)();
> cpumask_andnot(cpumask, cpu_online_mask, exclude_cpumask);
> cpumask_andnot(cpumask, cpumask, tmigr_available_cpumask);
>
It may lead to lockdep issue.
tmigr_init_isolation
guard(cpus_read_lock)()
tmigr_isolated_exclude_cpumask(cpumask)
guard(cpus_read_lock)()
--
Best regards,
Ridong
Powered by blists - more mailing lists