From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Qais Yousef Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/6] sched/cpuset: Bring back cpuset_mutex Date: Fri, 28 Apr 2023 12:22:16 +0100 Message-ID: <20230428112216.cftofdixwbl4hufm@airbuntu> References: <20230329125558.255239-1-juri.lelli@redhat.com> <20230329125558.255239-3-juri.lelli@redhat.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Return-path: DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=layalina-io.20221208.gappssmtp.com; s=20221208; t=1682680938; x=1685272938; h=in-reply-to:content-disposition:mime-version:references:message-id :subject:cc:to:from:date:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:reply-to; bh=zJgSTzgu9YtliSGCYghLe0j5dXYcDcHesNq23aEuzOY=; b=JzUGb2nbnQdOEy+fCVy1d07ZMcLNqZcFnocE+qzql7z90iPjdixMT6M4TPzfRwLFwj 4Fyqm5ke4Jk8pGzUBoA5KlH9jafEccsaekRgtzViTM8/v2fjj2ApEQdz0kOjx29YDiFf VLQFJu4z1dN2zyik04Hg5s5rYgl7Q2py/yW3yrB2An+MNwFmz6rRK0LC/m+muXZBxBck xlCbtJD8HiKGpWHCsnKdpYlZuoVefRHQlGQn520OE7NmX0OI+tCyNnVXEkd8Mprves0v hfqJFT3y6RAyCMsuSrDEyPsP3zaFQ9TEPG8pJ62+oQZ3ZdwcYS4dKrTunmcRkgPWlFu0 FlTA== Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: List-ID: Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit To: Juri Lelli Cc: Xuewen Yan , Waiman Long , Peter Zijlstra , Ingo Molnar , Tejun Heo , Zefan Li , Johannes Weiner , Hao Luo , Dietmar Eggemann , Steven Rostedt , linux-kernel-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org, luca.abeni-5rdYK369eBLQB0XuIGIEkQ@public.gmane.org, claudio-YOzL5CV4y4YG1A2ADO40+w@public.gmane.org, tommaso.cucinotta-5rdYK369eBLQB0XuIGIEkQ@public.gmane.org, bristot-H+wXaHxf7aLQT0dZR+AlfA@public.gmane.org, mathieu.poirier-QSEj5FYQhm4dnm+yROfE0A@public.gmane.org, cgroups-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org, Vincent Guittot , Wei Wang , Rick Yiu , Quentin Perret , Heiko Carstens , Vasily Gorbik On 04/27/23 07:53, Juri Lelli wrote: > Hi, > > On 27/04/23 10:58, Xuewen Yan wrote: > > HI Juri, > > > > Would this patch be merged tobe stable-rc? In kernel5.15, we also find > > that the rwsem would be blocked for a long time, when we change the > > task's cpuset cgroup. > > And when we revert to the mutex, the delay would disappear. > > Honestly, I'm not sure. This change is mostly improving performance, but > it is also true that it's fixing some priority inheritance corner cases. > So, I'm not sure it qualifies for stable, but it would be probably good to > have it there. I'm under the impression we need the whole lot back to stable, no? I'm not sure if we can decouple this patch from the rest. FWIW, I did my testing on 5.15 - so we can definitely help with the backport and testing for 5.15 and 5.10. Thanks!