From: Waiman Long <longman@redhat.com>
To: "Tejun Heo" <tj@kernel.org>,
"Johannes Weiner" <hannes@cmpxchg.org>,
"Michal Koutný" <mkoutny@suse.com>
Cc: cgroups@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
Waiman Long <longman@redhat.com>
Subject: [PATCH 3/3] cgroup/cpuset: Add warnings to catch inconsistency in exclusive CPUs
Date: Mon, 7 Apr 2025 17:21:05 -0400 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20250407212127.1534285-4-longman@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20250407212127.1534285-1-longman@redhat.com>
Add WARN_ON_ONCE() statements whenever new exclusive CPUs are being
added to a partition root to catch inconsistency in the way exclusive
CPUs are being handled in the cpuset code.
Signed-off-by: Waiman Long <longman@redhat.com>
---
kernel/cgroup/cpuset.c | 43 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++----------
1 file changed, 33 insertions(+), 10 deletions(-)
diff --git a/kernel/cgroup/cpuset.c b/kernel/cgroup/cpuset.c
index 1497a2a4b2a3..d0143b3dce47 100644
--- a/kernel/cgroup/cpuset.c
+++ b/kernel/cgroup/cpuset.c
@@ -1453,13 +1453,15 @@ static int remote_partition_enable(struct cpuset *cs, int new_prs,
* The requested exclusive_cpus must not be allocated to other
* partitions and it can't use up all the root's effective_cpus.
*
- * Note that if there is any local partition root above it or
- * remote partition root underneath it, its exclusive_cpus must
- * have overlapped with subpartitions_cpus.
+ * The effective_xcpus mask can contain offline CPUs, but there must
+ * be at least one or more online CPUs present before it can be enabled.
+ *
+ * Note that creating a remote partition with any local partition root
+ * above it or remote partition root underneath it is not allowed.
*/
compute_effective_exclusive_cpumask(cs, tmp->new_cpus, NULL);
- if (cpumask_empty(tmp->new_cpus) ||
- cpumask_intersects(tmp->new_cpus, subpartitions_cpus) ||
+ WARN_ON_ONCE(cpumask_intersects(tmp->new_cpus, subpartitions_cpus));
+ if (!cpumask_intersects(tmp->new_cpus, cpu_active_mask) ||
cpumask_subset(top_cpuset.effective_cpus, tmp->new_cpus))
return PERR_INVCPUS;
@@ -1555,6 +1557,7 @@ static void remote_cpus_update(struct cpuset *cs, struct cpumask *xcpus,
* left in the top cpuset.
*/
if (adding) {
+ WARN_ON_ONCE(cpumask_intersects(tmp->addmask, subpartitions_cpus));
if (!capable(CAP_SYS_ADMIN))
cs->prs_err = PERR_ACCESS;
else if (cpumask_intersects(tmp->addmask, subpartitions_cpus) ||
@@ -1664,7 +1667,7 @@ static int update_parent_effective_cpumask(struct cpuset *cs, int cmd,
bool nocpu;
lockdep_assert_held(&cpuset_mutex);
- WARN_ON_ONCE(is_remote_partition(cs));
+ WARN_ON_ONCE(is_remote_partition(cs)); /* For local partition only */
/*
* new_prs will only be changed for the partcmd_update and
@@ -1710,7 +1713,7 @@ static int update_parent_effective_cpumask(struct cpuset *cs, int cmd,
* exclusive_cpus not set. Sibling conflict should only happen
* if exclusive_cpus isn't set.
*/
- xcpus = tmp->new_cpus;
+ xcpus = tmp->delmask;
if (compute_effective_exclusive_cpumask(cs, xcpus, NULL))
WARN_ON_ONCE(!cpumask_empty(cs->exclusive_cpus));
@@ -1731,9 +1734,20 @@ static int update_parent_effective_cpumask(struct cpuset *cs, int cmd,
if (nocpu)
return PERR_NOCPUS;
- deleting = cpumask_and(tmp->delmask, xcpus, parent->effective_xcpus);
- if (deleting)
- subparts_delta++;
+ /*
+ * This function will only be called when all the preliminary
+ * checks have passed. At this point, the following condition
+ * should hold.
+ *
+ * (cs->effective_xcpus & cpu_active_mask) ⊆ parent->effective_cpus
+ *
+ * Warn if it is not the case.
+ */
+ cpumask_and(tmp->new_cpus, xcpus, cpu_active_mask);
+ WARN_ON_ONCE(!cpumask_subset(tmp->new_cpus, parent->effective_cpus));
+
+ deleting = true;
+ subparts_delta++;
new_prs = (cmd == partcmd_enable) ? PRS_ROOT : PRS_ISOLATED;
} else if (cmd == partcmd_disable) {
/*
@@ -1787,6 +1801,15 @@ static int update_parent_effective_cpumask(struct cpuset *cs, int cmd,
deleting = cpumask_and(tmp->delmask, tmp->delmask,
parent->effective_xcpus);
}
+ /*
+ * The new CPUs to be removed from parent's effective CPUs
+ * must be present.
+ */
+ if (deleting) {
+ cpumask_and(tmp->new_cpus, tmp->delmask, cpu_active_mask);
+ WARN_ON_ONCE(!cpumask_subset(tmp->new_cpus, parent->effective_cpus));
+ }
+
/*
* Make partition invalid if parent's effective_cpus could
* become empty and there are tasks in the parent.
--
2.48.1
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2025-04-07 21:22 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 5+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2025-04-07 21:21 [PATCH 0/3] cgroup/cpuset: Miscellaneous cleanup patches Waiman Long
2025-04-07 21:21 ` [PATCH 1/3] cgroup/cpuset: Always use cpu_active_mask Waiman Long
2025-04-07 21:21 ` [PATCH 2/3] cgroup/cpuset: Fix obsolete comment in cpuset_css_offline() Waiman Long
2025-04-07 21:21 ` Waiman Long [this message]
2025-04-07 22:05 ` [PATCH 0/3] cgroup/cpuset: Miscellaneous cleanup patches Tejun Heo
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20250407212127.1534285-4-longman@redhat.com \
--to=longman@redhat.com \
--cc=cgroups@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=hannes@cmpxchg.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mkoutny@suse.com \
--cc=tj@kernel.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox