Messages in this thread | | | Date | Tue, 28 Aug 2007 17:48:53 +0400 | From | Oleg Nesterov <> | Subject | cpusets vs cpu-hotplug interaction is broken? |
| |
(cpu-hotplug experts cc'ed)
On 08/25, Oleg Nesterov wrote: > > After the brief look at kernel/cpuset.c, it seems that attach_task() should > guarantee that the task can't use CPUs outside of cpuset->cpus_allowed. > > But this looks racy wrt sched_setaffinity() which does > > cpus_allowed = cpuset_cpus_allowed(p); > // callback_mutex is free > set_cpus_allowed(p); > > What if attach_task()->set_cpus_allowed() happens in between?
Actually, I think there is another problem, and cpuset_cpus_allowed() is just broken wrt CONFIG_HOTPLUG_CPU.
Suppose that CONFIG_CPUSETS is true, but we don't use cpusets. In that case all tasks in system belong to the top_cpuset (btw, why cpuset_init() sets init_task.cpuset? this was already done by cpuset_init_early()), and we should have the same behaviour as without CONFIG_CPUSETS.
By default, all tasks have ->cpus_allowed = CPU_MASK_ALL inherited from kernel_init(). This means that the task can use the new CPU right after cpu_up().
Now let's suppose that some task does sched_setaffinity(0, CPU_MASK_ALL). In that case, cpuset_cpus_allowed() sets ->cpus_allowed = cpu_online_map, and I think this is just wrong. Now that task doesn't see the new CPUs.
Of course, we have the similar problem with cpusets other than top_cpuset.
In short, unless I missed something, top_cpuset.cpus_allowed should be cpu_possible_map, guarantee_online_cpus() shouldn't mix "allowed" and "online" masks.
Oleg.
- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
| |