From: Tejun Heo <tj@kernel.org>
To: Guopeng Zhang <guopeng.zhang@linux.dev>,
Waiman Long <longman@redhat.com>
Cc: "Ridong Chen" <ridong.chen@linux.dev>,
"Johannes Weiner" <hannes@cmpxchg.org>,
"Michal Koutný" <mkoutny@suse.com>,
"Guopeng Zhang" <zhangguopeng@kylinos.cn>,
cgroups@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] cgroup/cpuset: Invalidate remote partition on housekeeping conflict
Date: Mon, 28 Sep 2026 08:44:40 -1000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <7f4c57b26ad120ab30adf35653f1dd94@kernel.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20260927095722.70660-1-guopeng.zhang@linux.dev>
Hello, Guopeng.
The following is a Claude-generated review.
On Sun, Sep 27, 2026 at 05:57:21PM +0800, Guopeng Zhang wrote:
> + bool updating = is_remote_partition(cs);
> +
> + if (!capable(CAP_SYS_ADMIN))
> + return PERR_ACCESS;
> +
> + if (!updating &&
> + (!cpumask_intersects(excpus, cpu_active_mask) ||
> + cpumask_subset(top_cpuset.effective_cpus, addcpus)))
> + return PERR_INVCPUS;
cs->remote_partition can be stale when remote_partition_enable() is
called. If a root <-> isolated switch of a valid remote partition fails
in update_prstate(), the partition is made invalid without
remote_partition_disable(), so the flag stays set and its CPUs stay in
subpartitions_cpus. A later enable then skips the PERR_INVCPUS checks.
With isolcpus=domain,4:
1. A is a member with cpuset.cpus 2-6 and cpuset.cpus.exclusive 2-4. B
has cpuset.cpus 2-4 and no cpuset.cpus.exclusive.
2. "isolated" to B's cpuset.cpus.partition. B becomes a valid remote
partition with effective_xcpus 2-4.
3. "root" to B's cpuset.cpus.partition fails with PERR_HKEEPING.
effective_xcpus is cleared but remote_partition stays set.
4. 5-6 to A's cpuset.cpus.exclusive. B's excpus becomes empty, which
matches the cleared effective_xcpus, so update_cpumasks_hier() skips
B.
5. "isolated" to B's cpuset.cpus.partition. This used to fail with
PERR_INVCPUS. Now B becomes a valid isolated partition with empty
effective_xcpus and the WARN_ON_ONCE() at the end of update_prstate()
triggers.
This is from reading the code, not reproduced. Maybe have the callers
pass whether it's an enable or an update instead of deriving it from
cs->remote_partition?
The stale flag itself is a separate, pre-existing bug. Switching B back
to member after step 3 trips the WARN_ON_ONCE(old_prs < 0) in
partition_xcpus_del().
Thanks.
--
tejun
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2026-09-28 18:44 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 6+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2026-09-27 9:57 [PATCH v2] cgroup/cpuset: Invalidate remote partition on housekeeping conflict Guopeng Zhang
2026-09-28 0:00 ` Waiman Long
2026-09-28 1:29 ` Ridong Chen
2026-09-28 18:44 ` Tejun Heo [this message]
2026-09-28 23:56 ` Waiman Long
2026-09-29 2:33 ` Guopeng Zhang
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=7f4c57b26ad120ab30adf35653f1dd94@kernel.org \
--to=tj@kernel.org \
--cc=cgroups@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=guopeng.zhang@linux.dev \
--cc=hannes@cmpxchg.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=longman@redhat.com \
--cc=mkoutny@suse.com \
--cc=ridong.chen@linux.dev \
--cc=zhangguopeng@kylinos.cn \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.