From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail-pf0-f200.google.com (mail-pf0-f200.google.com [209.85.192.200]) by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 386706B0260 for ; Tue, 31 Jan 2017 10:30:50 -0500 (EST) Received: by mail-pf0-f200.google.com with SMTP id d123so263566187pfd.0 for ; Tue, 31 Jan 2017 07:30:50 -0800 (PST) Received: from mx0a-001b2d01.pphosted.com (mx0a-001b2d01.pphosted.com. [148.163.156.1]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id c66si16258820pfb.26.2017.01.31.07.30.44 for (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Tue, 31 Jan 2017 07:30:44 -0800 (PST) Received: from pps.filterd (m0098410.ppops.net [127.0.0.1]) by mx0a-001b2d01.pphosted.com (8.16.0.20/8.16.0.20) with SMTP id v0VFToN0035281 for ; Tue, 31 Jan 2017 10:30:43 -0500 Received: from e28smtp06.in.ibm.com (e28smtp06.in.ibm.com [125.16.236.6]) by mx0a-001b2d01.pphosted.com with ESMTP id 28akc17hux-1 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NOT) for ; Tue, 31 Jan 2017 10:30:43 -0500 Received: from localhost by e28smtp06.in.ibm.com with IBM ESMTP SMTP Gateway: Authorized Use Only! Violators will be prosecuted for from ; Tue, 31 Jan 2017 21:00:40 +0530 Received: from d28relay09.in.ibm.com (d28relay09.in.ibm.com [9.184.220.160]) by d28dlp02.in.ibm.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8FD0C3940033 for ; Tue, 31 Jan 2017 21:00:37 +0530 (IST) Received: from d28av04.in.ibm.com (d28av04.in.ibm.com [9.184.220.66]) by d28relay09.in.ibm.com (8.14.9/8.14.9/NCO v10.0) with ESMTP id v0VFUb8Q27263146 for ; Tue, 31 Jan 2017 21:00:37 +0530 Received: from d28av04.in.ibm.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by d28av04.in.ibm.com (8.14.4/8.14.4/NCO v10.0 AVout) with ESMTP id v0VFUalE020261 for ; Tue, 31 Jan 2017 21:00:37 +0530 Subject: Re: [RFC V2 05/12] cpuset: Add cpuset_inc() inside cpuset_init() References: <20170130033602.12275-1-khandual@linux.vnet.ibm.com> <20170130033602.12275-6-khandual@linux.vnet.ibm.com> <20170130203003.dm2ydoi3e6cbbwcj@suse.de> <8f442e1d-6c4d-990b-74e7-6d9a16c4576f@suse.cz> From: Anshuman Khandual Date: Tue, 31 Jan 2017 21:00:33 +0530 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <8f442e1d-6c4d-990b-74e7-6d9a16c4576f@suse.cz> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-15 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-Id: Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org List-ID: To: Vlastimil Babka , Mel Gorman , Anshuman Khandual Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-mm@kvack.org, mhocko@suse.com, minchan@kernel.org, aneesh.kumar@linux.vnet.ibm.com, bsingharora@gmail.com, srikar@linux.vnet.ibm.com, haren@linux.vnet.ibm.com, jglisse@redhat.com, dave.hansen@intel.com, dan.j.williams@intel.com On 01/31/2017 08:06 PM, Vlastimil Babka wrote: > On 01/30/2017 09:30 PM, Mel Gorman wrote: >> On Mon, Jan 30, 2017 at 09:05:46AM +0530, Anshuman Khandual wrote: >>> Currently cpusets_enabled() wrongfully returns 0 even if we have a root >>> cpuset configured on the system. This got missed when jump level was >>> introduced in place of number_of_cpusets with the commit 664eeddeef65 >>> ("mm: page_alloc: use jump labels to avoid checking number_of_cpusets") >>> . This fixes the problem so that cpusets_enabled() returns positive even >>> for the root cpuset. >>> >>> Fixes: 664eeddeef65 ("mm: page_alloc: use jump labels to avoid") >>> Signed-off-by: Anshuman Khandual >> >> Superficially, this appears to always activate the cpuset_enabled >> branch() when it doesn't really make sense that the root cpuset be >> restricted. > > Yes that's why root cpuset doesn't "count", as it's not supposed to be > restricted (it's also documented in cpusets.txt) Thus the "Fixes:" tag > is very misleading. Agreed, I have removed the "Fixes: " tag in the proposed RFC already posted on this thread where it puts it as a new enablement instead and an addition to the capability what we already have with cpuset. It will be great if you can please take a look and provide feedback. -- To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in the body to majordomo@kvack.org. For more info on Linux MM, see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ . Don't email: email@kvack.org