From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Frederic Weisbecker Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 6/6] cpuset: Add cpuset.isolation_mask file Date: Mon, 19 Jul 2021 15:17:04 +0200 Message-ID: <20210719131704.GA116346@lothringen> References: <20210714135420.69624-1-frederic@kernel.org> <20210714135420.69624-7-frederic@kernel.org> <20210714231338.GA65963@lothringen> <20210715090419.GH2725@worktop.programming.kicks-ass.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Return-path: DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=kernel.org; s=k20201202; t=1626700626; bh=mNX83eIS2g05s9c9QnvJuS5+XyJQcbNL2BxYEIAFG0s=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:References:In-Reply-To:From; b=F9A/Q5smYmjuQAy1aDH4g5YIn755qVr2mQiHtfOUV7c8AMx0jyiX3tXLmSPhjtEAY 3kQ/6BuMJ6AYy6tFq6tWDieOy1qdL2Eg/EN2lqJ+zuerXQyIeVRPyiOmc3zOKfNyyr rOpScydKnA5BCj+XkQZWhg2sQvmVE7b1Ihu+C5akwuH8TRtG60N8/zzEMvRiPt8JFU QrLvz3sGawj0+L2zC7ppVmE4KQmDulCVYqW7vrbFc+cN3cONMwzHmChhpDgvPp596M SXKdnQStzGqVti/mOQ1woOUr0eG4PMUE8U9OH3eatVGFlVgb4TGo2utnPrISDmpUIq 3Iw7qFIypkJZg== Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20210715090419.GH2725-IIpfhp3q70z/8w/KjCw3T+5/BudmfyzbbVWyRVo5IupeoWH0uzbU5w@public.gmane.org> List-ID: Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit To: Peter Zijlstra Cc: Valentin Schneider , LKML , Tejun Heo , Juri Lelli , Alex Belits , Nitesh Lal , Thomas Gleixner , Nicolas Saenz , Christoph Lameter , Marcelo Tosatti , Zefan Li , cgroups-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org On Thu, Jul 15, 2021 at 11:04:19AM +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote: > On Thu, Jul 15, 2021 at 01:13:38AM +0200, Frederic Weisbecker wrote: > > On Wed, Jul 14, 2021 at 06:52:43PM +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote: > > > > cpusets already has means to create paritions; why are you creating > > > something else? > > > > I was about to answer that the semantics of isolcpus, which reference > > a NULL domain, are different from SD_LOAD_BALANCE implied by > > cpuset.sched_load_balance. But then I realize that SD_LOAD_BALANCE has > > been removed. > > > > How cpuset.sched_load_balance is implemented then? Commit > > e669ac8ab952df2f07dee1e1efbf40647d6de332 ("sched: Remove checks against > > SD_LOAD_BALANCE") advertize that setting cpuset.sched_load_balance to 0 > > ends up creating NULL domain but that's not what I get. For example if I > > mount a single cpuset root (no other cpuset mountpoints): > > SD_LOAD_BALANCE was only for when you wanted to stop balancing inside a > domain tree. That no longer happens (and hasn't for a *long* time). > Cpusets simply creates multiple domain trees (or the empty one if its > just one CPU). Ok. > > > $ mount -t cgroup none ./cpuset -o cpuset > > $ cd cpuset > > $ cat cpuset.cpus > > 0-7 > > $ cat cpuset.sched_load_balance > > 1 > > $ echo 0 > cpuset.sched_load_balance > > $ ls /sys/kernel/debug/domains/cpu1/ > > domain0 domain1 > > > > I still get the domains on all CPUs... > > (note, that's the cgroup-v1 interface, the cgroup-v2 interface is > significantly different) > > I'd suggest doing: echo 1 > /debug/sched/verbose, if I do the above I > get: > > [1290784.889705] CPU0 attaching NULL sched-domain. > [1290784.894830] CPU1 attaching NULL sched-domain. Thanks! Eventually I uninstalled cgmanager and things seem to work now. I have no idea why and I'm not sure I'm willing to investigate further :o)