From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from smtp.kernel.org (aws-us-west-2-korg-mail-1.web.codeaurora.org [10.30.226.201]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 6C7FE4A1A; Thu, 9 Jan 2025 01:55:48 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=10.30.226.201 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1736387748; cv=none; b=sb5W8RVWSSWY4GnqDcInuWCqcvDXyw4vkplgkqPP+q6H2p/lKgLYPX3xuiPhs3I0Nx3xj0/aSZkOJSdP+36mhSG6Rr1eEyPZsRKJcXliH7/pokjt6xosZ+QpPHWGz8hNAmAZChT1TlOltEfk1yKM+ihake14ls5gUH2AcWojspQ= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1736387748; c=relaxed/simple; bh=wIIHCAdo+BNn2/xX5nozLXuFjnGTaZHYkTnV32H6hkM=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:Message-ID:References:MIME-Version: Content-Type:Content-Disposition:In-Reply-To; b=Ab1EnLNFQg1PASriy0fxMyJ/KCDWikml4YQaIjYvX/GXJNwOCRuPLOUajo9xaRv0SOtC8B0i3aiax9RrFYzYbpvcyOsDPiSxd4JxnEH6u9rEfruSnXB2xZFIy/zeVg9dRmBUT6gUuGlTBWcsBcmIYwtGKN7yQvpWOOw1JpAqfcE= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=kernel.org header.i=@kernel.org header.b=F3Iit4hb; arc=none smtp.client-ip=10.30.226.201 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=kernel.org header.i=@kernel.org header.b="F3Iit4hb" Received: by smtp.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id D1011C4CED3; Thu, 9 Jan 2025 01:55:47 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=kernel.org; s=k20201202; t=1736387748; bh=wIIHCAdo+BNn2/xX5nozLXuFjnGTaZHYkTnV32H6hkM=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:References:In-Reply-To:From; b=F3Iit4hbQGqjFqJhti3BDvwygYHHUOUDSseK8MqjkohVmR7+MUfaznC54+MQii9S1 6XXuFBEI5EI6hOUoSiyWQAOCEnsVPxDd3Ua/DA1cyjTUxUsUGSF53PYo4JnpMpGGXb pVyN4vQ7zc58YCY9sYLBxFUtwJCRqq72g9EmB3eci+sZdjYNjKu6wKjncEPkA6uJMS Ki3OLx32g6e+JRvgFwp/OYbHTecOrKDCExVF1P5vW6MkCLOoQIRQCpw8hNlPB7hbri qiogpVEWZIISZY23IuENtSuWhJMBHxS3MrMB7ouAOSBP128YUQ7MDtWNy/i0muxpU2 kD+xpS2ZficFg== Date: Wed, 8 Jan 2025 15:55:46 -1000 From: Tejun Heo To: Chen Ridong Cc: Waiman Long , hannes@cmpxchg.org, mkoutny@suse.com, cgroups@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] cgroup/cpuset: remove kernfs active break Message-ID: References: <20250106081904.721655-1-chenridong@huaweicloud.com> <9250b4e8-8ef8-4a85-af24-14a34cc72e3b@huaweicloud.com> Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: cgroups@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <9250b4e8-8ef8-4a85-af24-14a34cc72e3b@huaweicloud.com> On Thu, Jan 09, 2025 at 09:29:59AM +0800, Chen Ridong wrote: > Hi, Tj and Longman, I am sorry, the fix tag is not exactly right. I just > failed to reproduce this issue at the version 5.10, and I found this > warning was added with the commit bdb2fd7fc56e ("kernfs: Skip > kernfs_drain_open_files() more aggressively"), which is at version 6.1. > I believe it should both fix bdb2fd7fc56e ("kernfs: Skip > kernfs_drain_open_files() more aggressively") and 76bb5ab8f6e3 ("cpuset: > break kernfs active protection in cpuset_write_resmask()"). Should I > resend a new patch? No worries. I updated the commit in place. Thanks. -- tejun