From: Sasha Levin <sashal@kernel.org>
To: stable@vger.kernel.org
Cc: Hui Peng <benquike@gmail.com>,
Guopeng Zhang <guopeng.zhang@linux.dev>,
Waiman Long <longman@redhat.com>, Tejun Heo <tj@kernel.org>,
Sasha Levin <sashal@kernel.org>
Subject: [PATCH 6.18.y 3/3] cgroup/cpuset: Return PERR_NOCPUS in remote_partition_enable() on subpartitions_cpus conflict
Date: Tue, 29 Sep 2026 08:10:20 -0400 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20260929121020.3306361-3-sashal@kernel.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20260929121020.3306361-1-sashal@kernel.org>
From: Hui Peng <benquike@gmail.com>
[ Upstream commit 31c88350b7dd1522792f726f79607f31bb55c50f ]
When a remote partition is created underneath an existing local partition
via a non-partition (PRS_MEMBER) intermediate cgroup, update_prstate() sees
parent->partition_root_state == PRS_MEMBER and calls
remote_partition_enable().
Commit 86888c7bd117 ("cgroup/cpuset: Add warnings to catch inconsistency
in exclusive CPUs") replaced the cpumask_intersects(tmp->new_cpus,
subpartitions_cpus) error check in remote_partition_enable() with
WARN_ON_ONCE(). As a result, remote_partition_enable() emits a warning
and proceeds to enable the remote partition on CPUs that are already
owned by the ancestor local partition in subpartitions_cpus.
This can be reproduced on Linux 7.3.0-rc3 with:
mkdir -p /tmp/cg1
mount -t cgroup2 none /tmp/cg1
echo "+cpuset" > /tmp/cg1/cgroup.subtree_control
mkdir /tmp/cg1/A
echo 1 > /tmp/cg1/A/cpuset.cpus
echo 1 > /tmp/cg1/A/cpuset.cpus.exclusive
echo root > /tmp/cg1/A/cpuset.cpus.partition
echo "+cpuset" > /tmp/cg1/A/cgroup.subtree_control
mkdir /tmp/cg1/A/B
echo 1 > /tmp/cg1/A/B/cpuset.cpus
echo 1 > /tmp/cg1/A/B/cpuset.cpus.exclusive
echo "+cpuset" > /tmp/cg1/A/B/cgroup.subtree_control
mkdir /tmp/cg1/A/B/D
echo 1 > /tmp/cg1/A/B/D/cpuset.cpus
echo 1 > /tmp/cg1/A/B/D/cpuset.cpus.exclusive
echo root > /tmp/cg1/A/B/D/cpuset.cpus.partition
which triggers:
WARNING: kernel/cgroup/cpuset.c:1594 at remote_partition_enable+0x1c1/0x300
and leaves both /tmp/cg1/A and /tmp/cg1/A/B/D as active root partitions
claiming exclusive CPU 1.
Fix this by returning PERR_NOCPUS when tmp->new_cpus intersects
subpartitions_cpus in remote_partition_enable(), matching the error code
used by remote_cpus_update() for the same subpartitions_cpus conflict, and
add a regression test case to
tools/testing/selftests/cgroup/test_cpuset_prs.sh.
Tested in QEMU on Linux 7.3.0-rc3 using the reproducer above and
tools/testing/selftests/cgroup/test_cpuset_prs.sh.
Fixes: 86888c7bd117 ("cgroup/cpuset: Add warnings to catch inconsistency in exclusive CPUs")
Suggested-by: Guopeng Zhang <guopeng.zhang@linux.dev>
Cc: stable@vger.kernel.org
Assisted-by: LLM
Signed-off-by: Hui Peng <benquike@gmail.com>
Reviewed-by: Waiman Long <longman@redhat.com>
Signed-off-by: Tejun Heo <tj@kernel.org>
Signed-off-by: Sasha Levin <sashal@kernel.org>
---
kernel/cgroup/cpuset.c | 3 ++-
tools/testing/selftests/cgroup/test_cpuset_prs.sh | 2 ++
2 files changed, 4 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
diff --git a/kernel/cgroup/cpuset.c b/kernel/cgroup/cpuset.c
index 17d4ef96794c1..eebbede820700 100644
--- a/kernel/cgroup/cpuset.c
+++ b/kernel/cgroup/cpuset.c
@@ -1623,10 +1623,11 @@ static int remote_partition_enable(struct cpuset *cs, int new_prs,
* above it or remote partition root underneath it is not allowed.
*/
compute_excpus(cs, tmp->new_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;
+ if (cpumask_intersects(tmp->new_cpus, subpartitions_cpus))
+ return PERR_NOCPUS;
if (((new_prs == PRS_ISOLATED) &&
!isolated_cpus_can_update(tmp->new_cpus, NULL)) ||
prstate_housekeeping_conflict(new_prs, tmp->new_cpus))
diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/cgroup/test_cpuset_prs.sh b/tools/testing/selftests/cgroup/test_cpuset_prs.sh
index 592e533cd4d7b..6f7e387f68e5b 100755
--- a/tools/testing/selftests/cgroup/test_cpuset_prs.sh
+++ b/tools/testing/selftests/cgroup/test_cpuset_prs.sh
@@ -297,6 +297,8 @@ TEST_MATRIX=(
" C0-4:X2-4:S+ C1-4:X2-4:S+:P2 C2-4:X4:P1 \
. . . X1 . 0 A1:0-1|A2:2-4|A3:2-4 \
A1:P0|A2:P2|A3:P-1 2-4"
+ " CX1-3:P1 CX1-3 CX1-3 . . . P1 . 0 A1:1-3|A2:1-3|A3:1-3 \
+ A1:P1|A2:P0|A3:P-1"
# Remote partition offline tests
" C0-3:S+ C1-3:S+ C2-3 . X2-3 X2-3 X2-3:P2:O2=0 . 0 A1:0-1|A2:1|A3:3 A1:P0|A3:P2 2-3"
--
2.53.0
prev parent reply other threads:[~2026-09-29 12:10 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 4+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2026-09-29 6:43 FAILED: patch "[PATCH] cgroup/cpuset: Return PERR_NOCPUS in" failed to apply to 6.18-stable tree gregkh
2026-09-29 12:10 ` [PATCH 6.18.y 1/3] cgroup/cpuset: Move up prstate_housekeeping_conflict() helper Sasha Levin
2026-09-29 12:10 ` [PATCH 6.18.y 2/3] cgroup/cpuset: Ensure domain isolated CPUs stay in root or isolated partition Sasha Levin
2026-09-29 12:10 ` Sasha Levin [this message]
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=20260929121020.3306361-3-sashal@kernel.org \
--to=sashal@kernel.org \
--cc=benquike@gmail.com \
--cc=guopeng.zhang@linux.dev \
--cc=longman@redhat.com \
--cc=stable@vger.kernel.org \
--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