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 9DD49C77B73 for ; Thu, 13 Apr 2023 00:03:39 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S229615AbjDMADi (ORCPT ); Wed, 12 Apr 2023 20:03:38 -0400 Received: from lindbergh.monkeyblade.net ([23.128.96.19]:55560 "EHLO lindbergh.monkeyblade.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S229593AbjDMADh (ORCPT ); Wed, 12 Apr 2023 20:03:37 -0400 Received: from mail-pj1-x102d.google.com (mail-pj1-x102d.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::102d]) by lindbergh.monkeyblade.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 7E3E66A47; Wed, 12 Apr 2023 17:03:36 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-pj1-x102d.google.com with SMTP id cm18-20020a17090afa1200b0024713adf69dso872648pjb.3; Wed, 12 Apr 2023 17:03:36 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20221208; t=1681344216; x=1683936216; h=in-reply-to:content-disposition:mime-version:references:message-id :subject:cc:to:from:date:sender:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id :reply-to; bh=pyutDkp5jrSZUQ7ZSCUPusZLIPe20FEF4eoH9aQqT9U=; b=UKlpb+cigpV7szwbL/NVXYViJrjWbFojBNTvxQ7mTTikfFSfcMzWzCQ/O4yLyfeYs9 WO+FSQoDv/VI5mgMKoG7fwDuIRcyUYxHZFF26GwFjPkzra8QQ2xneaHdJL2UKRZpxLlb 9VwlEogRmjOA0vS2VLczf4zOgReqgfjKBg75G0sp3ItfvjEtC/YTb0O4vNOK03UxQobZ v8aLtuXqZMOaMsvMIa6w5TWdigol1d+Z6H8imco42YqyrD5ZFRFygRubmubuegyjtE0B O7tNapemKRqxRL0wgNEJUIPxjiYMC2tJoQnRgCCzywzU7RBEEuJ7YoXOCaWuXqw/WQBL jhdQ== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20221208; t=1681344216; x=1683936216; h=in-reply-to:content-disposition:mime-version:references:message-id :subject:cc:to:from:date:sender:x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc :subject:date:message-id:reply-to; bh=pyutDkp5jrSZUQ7ZSCUPusZLIPe20FEF4eoH9aQqT9U=; b=Gr3rTPNsTAKpGH6KiuCpEbCToYSzl6ydcw88MDNHJfiNU1fsZ/0ogS/HTYHexTxRxS trzEBM60evVpC0W1YZ292DwUgvfXKdRQbGRU6BQkIUC9AdiaUpslM2XOuCis9OiLFTie p+GgxvYe8LCri06ejuYBnnektMlbmWtN9t4X7aO99s4WUIE3lX0ShtKON1gLh9QNLv2r tISeaGg9Vj/R2P5lU+kdkrmHkmXzRAiGvYY0UejR77kxcBRhs503eGTyWLJ2wae6UKGW o5k0jF0OIqsZ7XuN1lyvWeEkjYIoQCZt21wGAWeOxTU2vdactL5OYntOsgrRNr4qqpuR UfKw== X-Gm-Message-State: AAQBX9dz0kaH3tiol3TI4JozZww+1zEn2+zZLQng6sbt+wfMFXOi3gD1 qYnpfM4yb+ykroOUYbwpReQ= X-Google-Smtp-Source: AKy350b5nRy45dcjnYkFzfHskXOi3Lp7CqvWMDpWUw5H2P+CRntPZh1X0IC4T25gVYwBpplY5m91nA== X-Received: by 2002:a17:902:c40f:b0:1a2:56f4:d369 with SMTP id k15-20020a170902c40f00b001a256f4d369mr142618plk.19.1681344215640; Wed, 12 Apr 2023 17:03:35 -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 jo10-20020a170903054a00b001a190baea88sm148167plb.97.2023.04.12.17.03.34 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256/256); Wed, 12 Apr 2023 17:03:35 -0700 (PDT) Sender: Tejun Heo Date: Wed, 12 Apr 2023 14:03:32 -1000 From: Tejun Heo To: Waiman Long Cc: Zefan Li , Johannes Weiner , Jonathan Corbet , Shuah Khan , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, cgroups@vger.kernel.org, linux-doc@vger.kernel.org, linux-kselftest@vger.kernel.org, Juri Lelli , Valentin Schneider , Frederic Weisbecker Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 0/5] cgroup/cpuset: A new "isolcpus" paritition Message-ID: References: <20230412153758.3088111-1-longman@redhat.com> <1ce6a073-e573-0c32-c3d8-f67f3d389a28@redhat.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-doc@vger.kernel.org Hello, On Wed, Apr 12, 2023 at 04:33:29PM -0400, Waiman Long wrote: > I think we can. You mean having a new "cpuset.cpus.isolated" cgroupfs file. > So there will be one in the root cgroup that defines all the isolated CPUs > one can have. It is then distributed down the hierarchy and can be claimed > only if a cgroup becomes an "isolated" partition. There will be a slight Yeah, that seems a lot more congruent with the typical pattern. > change in the semantics of an "isolated" partition, but I doubt there will > be much users out there. I haven't thought through it too hard but what prevents staying compatible with the current behavior? > If you are OK with this approach, I can modify my patch series to do that. Thanks. -- tejun