From: Gabriele Monaco <gmonaco@redhat.com>
To: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
Anna-Maria Behnsen <anna-maria@linutronix.de>,
Frederic Weisbecker <frederic@kernel.org>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
Waiman Long <longman@redhat.com>
Cc: Gabriele Monaco <gmonaco@redhat.com>
Subject: [PATCH v8 6/7] cgroup/cpuset: Fail if isolated and nohz_full don't leave any housekeeping
Date: Mon, 14 Jul 2025 15:30:57 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20250714133050.193108-15-gmonaco@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20250714133050.193108-9-gmonaco@redhat.com>
Currently the user can set up isolated cpus via cpuset and nohz_full in
such a way that leaves no housekeeping CPU (i.e. no CPU that is neither
domain isolated nor nohz full). This can be a problem for other
subsystems (e.g. the timer wheel imgration).
Prevent this configuration by blocking any assignation that would cause
the union of domain isolated cpus and nohz_full to covers all CPUs.
Signed-off-by: Gabriele Monaco <gmonaco@redhat.com>
---
kernel/cgroup/cpuset.c | 56 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
1 file changed, 56 insertions(+)
diff --git a/kernel/cgroup/cpuset.c b/kernel/cgroup/cpuset.c
index 6e3f44ffaa219..a946d85ce954a 100644
--- a/kernel/cgroup/cpuset.c
+++ b/kernel/cgroup/cpuset.c
@@ -1275,6 +1275,19 @@ static void isolated_cpus_update(int old_prs, int new_prs, struct cpumask *xcpus
cpumask_andnot(isolated_cpus, isolated_cpus, xcpus);
}
+/*
+ * isolated_cpus_should_update - Returns if the isolated_cpus mask needs update
+ * @prs: new or old partition_root_state
+ * @parent: parent cpuset
+ * Return: true if isolated_cpus needs modification, false otherwise
+ */
+static bool isolated_cpus_should_update(int prs, struct cpuset *parent)
+{
+ if (!parent)
+ parent = &top_cpuset;
+ return prs != parent->partition_root_state;
+}
+
/*
* partition_xcpus_add - Add new exclusive CPUs to partition
* @new_prs: new partition_root_state
@@ -1339,6 +1352,35 @@ static bool partition_xcpus_del(int old_prs, struct cpuset *parent,
return isolcpus_updated;
}
+/*
+ * isolcpus_nohz_conflict - check for isolated & nohz_full conflicts
+ * @new_cpus: cpu mask for cpus that are going to be isolated
+ * Return: true if there is conflict, false otherwise
+ *
+ * If nohz_full is enabled and we have isolated CPUs, their combination must
+ * still leave housekeeping CPUs.
+ */
+static bool isolcpus_nohz_conflict(struct cpumask *new_cpus)
+{
+ cpumask_var_t full_hk_cpus;
+ int res = false;
+
+ if (!housekeeping_enabled(HK_TYPE_KERNEL_NOISE))
+ return false;
+
+ if (!alloc_cpumask_var(&full_hk_cpus, GFP_KERNEL))
+ return true;
+
+ cpumask_and(full_hk_cpus, housekeeping_cpumask(HK_TYPE_KERNEL_NOISE),
+ housekeeping_cpumask(HK_TYPE_DOMAIN));
+ cpumask_and(full_hk_cpus, full_hk_cpus, cpu_online_mask);
+ if (!cpumask_weight_andnot(full_hk_cpus, new_cpus))
+ res = true;
+
+ free_cpumask_var(full_hk_cpus);
+ return res;
+}
+
static void update_exclusion_cpumasks(bool isolcpus_updated)
{
int ret;
@@ -1464,6 +1506,9 @@ static int remote_partition_enable(struct cpuset *cs, int new_prs,
if (!cpumask_intersects(tmp->new_cpus, cpu_active_mask) ||
cpumask_subset(top_cpuset.effective_cpus, tmp->new_cpus))
return PERR_INVCPUS;
+ if (isolated_cpus_should_update(new_prs, NULL) &&
+ isolcpus_nohz_conflict(tmp->new_cpus))
+ return PERR_HKEEPING;
spin_lock_irq(&callback_lock);
isolcpus_updated = partition_xcpus_add(new_prs, NULL, tmp->new_cpus);
@@ -1563,6 +1608,9 @@ static void remote_cpus_update(struct cpuset *cs, struct cpumask *xcpus,
else if (cpumask_intersects(tmp->addmask, subpartitions_cpus) ||
cpumask_subset(top_cpuset.effective_cpus, tmp->addmask))
cs->prs_err = PERR_NOCPUS;
+ else if (isolated_cpus_should_update(prs, NULL) &&
+ isolcpus_nohz_conflict(tmp->addmask))
+ cs->prs_err = PERR_HKEEPING;
if (cs->prs_err)
goto invalidate;
}
@@ -1914,6 +1962,12 @@ static int update_parent_effective_cpumask(struct cpuset *cs, int cmd,
return err;
}
+ if (deleting && isolated_cpus_should_update(new_prs, parent) &&
+ isolcpus_nohz_conflict(tmp->delmask)) {
+ cs->prs_err = PERR_HKEEPING;
+ return PERR_HKEEPING;
+ }
+
/*
* Change the parent's effective_cpus & effective_xcpus (top cpuset
* only).
@@ -2934,6 +2988,8 @@ static int update_prstate(struct cpuset *cs, int new_prs)
* Need to update isolated_cpus.
*/
isolcpus_updated = true;
+ if (isolcpus_nohz_conflict(cs->effective_xcpus))
+ err = PERR_HKEEPING;
} else {
/*
* Switching back to member is always allowed even if it
--
2.50.1
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2025-07-14 13:31 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 15+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2025-07-14 13:30 [PATCH v8 0/7] timers: Exclude isolated cpus from timer migration Gabriele Monaco
2025-07-14 13:30 ` [PATCH v8 1/7] timers: Rename tmigr 'online' bit to 'available' Gabriele Monaco
2025-07-14 13:30 ` [PATCH v8 2/7] timers: Add the available mask in timer migration Gabriele Monaco
2025-07-24 10:20 ` Frederic Weisbecker
2025-07-14 13:30 ` [PATCH v8 3/7] timers: Use scoped_guard when setting/clearing the tmigr available flag Gabriele Monaco
2025-07-24 10:29 ` Frederic Weisbecker
2025-07-14 13:30 ` [PATCH v8 4/7] cgroup/cpuset: Rename update_unbound_workqueue_cpumask() to update_exclusion_cpumasks() Gabriele Monaco
2025-07-24 10:33 ` Frederic Weisbecker
2025-07-14 13:30 ` [PATCH v8 5/7] sched/isolation: Force housekeeping if isolcpus and nohz_full don't leave any Gabriele Monaco
2025-07-14 13:30 ` Gabriele Monaco [this message]
2025-07-24 13:01 ` [PATCH v8 6/7] cgroup/cpuset: Fail if isolated and nohz_full don't leave any housekeeping Frederic Weisbecker
2025-07-14 13:30 ` [PATCH v8 7/7] timers: Exclude isolated cpus from timer migration Gabriele Monaco
2025-07-24 23:05 ` Frederic Weisbecker
2025-07-25 6:42 ` Gabriele Monaco
2025-07-25 10:55 ` Frederic Weisbecker
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=20250714133050.193108-15-gmonaco@redhat.com \
--to=gmonaco@redhat.com \
--cc=anna-maria@linutronix.de \
--cc=frederic@kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=longman@redhat.com \
--cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
/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;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).