From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8D410C43334 for ; Mon, 13 Jun 2022 03:12:59 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S236875AbiFMDM5 (ORCPT ); Sun, 12 Jun 2022 23:12:57 -0400 Received: from lindbergh.monkeyblade.net ([23.128.96.19]:53824 "EHLO lindbergh.monkeyblade.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S238293AbiFMDMz (ORCPT ); Sun, 12 Jun 2022 23:12:55 -0400 Received: from mail-pl1-x635.google.com (mail-pl1-x635.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::635]) by lindbergh.monkeyblade.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 982E2DFCE; Sun, 12 Jun 2022 20:12:54 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-pl1-x635.google.com with SMTP id f8so3988538plo.9; Sun, 12 Jun 2022 20:12:54 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20210112; h=sender:date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:references:mime-version :content-disposition:in-reply-to; bh=q0gGWcWV/COJT901q1rc8QzcrP5DaNECZkTvshE+F+Q=; b=KyQJjJ5e7Nsc4ypOYCGc1PPbWbAidU7McvnzqEwhmXBSKGt+XA+UKo4C0rStxYLtJ6 rzzT7/GhMYx3yzArDjKvdHv48bl1IH5UTHIo6z8v3HO0+YiK0Ouxtqo8iVvuBkoJpNUj Xw49TN+kG5PMWL7Zmdq/LcnxdEME5yBFZzB5+q2WmWf9oibGDOHANnGUF0XVZr1TDpAT OGPBKSva3rbfUUvwOG56eu3S0Eal0dSMaPyP8UCn0t556oli2wM6QdU6PfNuhaRUeetW PDazGjTXbMEwdTPjrNC1IfAHzRwTtJU7evS9DKVtupE8v9qPoM++WUb2O4s5v7QxmPal tDcw== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20210112; h=x-gm-message-state:sender:date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id :references:mime-version:content-disposition:in-reply-to; bh=q0gGWcWV/COJT901q1rc8QzcrP5DaNECZkTvshE+F+Q=; b=KQDoAaYeTFuAa5+S0U1mKvyLYF2VKqKVuKru9kvKPrEGHaoOS/f6nd43haDlPXGP+s Q6rufbISwuKciiWXTGY3tgqOFBqGBwHzpzWyiqj+5CE6PtPTmQCP1ZE0O3gPXervnNfM bUuTQA8c58eK/RPFEIjQq0PtPnMZIi3tTZH51z/WjzbfkiYuTX9bK0GcF9VseO+J7eNe KEi9QYoy2yE4bsxgGm2ypiXD2MV8MOr/nHEzlaC7lb9gKRFi4UKD2DM5n5Ij0klndiws gEYGPqWF4xWiMh1pAVJoWpA6aIogi9wR6S/9w08BirOtIBfXX75IXv/vpZme9kyZACs1 Cqrw== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM531f71unLdESh36gmpp8wZhJRdeFBDHljrShjE7iqctv+KQxH+U5 nsH8o4+CzVurzhiWsltCM9k= X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJxhWu5uQt6Se6MpSnQ4Yq2wcgiALwT33Ycu65UT8s52QfSmAr2EACBf0v+/7oDFaCHYncX6eA== X-Received: by 2002:a17:902:f646:b0:168:e2da:8931 with SMTP id m6-20020a170902f64600b00168e2da8931mr1018319plg.84.1655089973994; Sun, 12 Jun 2022 20:12:53 -0700 (PDT) Received: from localhost (2603-800c-1a02-1bae-a7fa-157f-969a-4cde.res6.spectrum.com. [2603:800c:1a02:1bae:a7fa:157f:969a:4cde]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id b11-20020a1709027e0b00b0015ed003552fsm3737642plm.293.2022.06.12.20.12.52 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256/256); Sun, 12 Jun 2022 20:12:53 -0700 (PDT) Sender: Tejun Heo Date: Sun, 12 Jun 2022 17:12:51 -1000 From: Tejun Heo To: Waiman Long Cc: Zefan Li , Johannes Weiner , Jonathan Corbet , Shuah Khan , cgroups@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-doc@vger.kernel.org, linux-kselftest@vger.kernel.org, Andrew Morton , Roman Gushchin , Phil Auld , Peter Zijlstra , Juri Lelli , Frederic Weisbecker , Marcelo Tosatti , Michal =?iso-8859-1?Q?Koutn=FD?= Subject: Re: [PATCH v11 7/8] cgroup/cpuset: Update description of cpuset.cpus.partition in cgroup-v2.rst Message-ID: References: <20220510153413.400020-1-longman@redhat.com> <20220510153413.400020-8-longman@redhat.com> <404171dc-0da3-21f2-5003-9718f875e967@redhat.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <404171dc-0da3-21f2-5003-9718f875e967@redhat.com> Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-doc@vger.kernel.org Hello, On Sun, Jun 12, 2022 at 11:02:38PM -0400, Waiman Long wrote: > That is the behavior enforced by setting the CPU_EXCLUSIVE bit in cgroup v1. > I haven't explicitly change it to make it different in cgroup v2. The major > reason is that I don't want change to one cpuset to affect a sibling > partition as it may make the code more complicate to validate if a partition > is valid. If at all possible, I'd really like to avoid situations where a parent can't withdraw resources due to something that a descendant does. Thanks. -- tejun