Re: [PATCH-next v5 1/6] cgroup/cpuset: Fix node inconsistencies between cpuset_update_tasks_nodemask() and cpuset_attach()

From: Ridong Chen

Date: Tue Jun 02 2026 - 09:57:03 EST




On 2026/6/2 10:31, Waiman Long wrote:
> Whenever memory node mask is changed, there are 4 places where the node
> mask has to be updated or used.
> 1) task's node mask via cpuset_change_task_nodemask()
> 2) memory policy binding via mpol_rebind_mm()
> 3) if memory migration is enabled, migrate from old_mems_allowed to
> the new node mask via cpuset_migrate_mm().
> 4) setting old_mems_allowed
>
> These memory actions are done in cpuset_update_tasks_nodemask() and
> cpuset_attach(). However there are inconsistencies in what node masks
> are being used in these 2 functions.
>
> In cpuset_update_tasks_nodemask(),
> - cpuset_change_task_nodemask(): guarantee_online_mems()
> - mpol_rebind_mm(): mems_allowed
> - cpuset_migrate_mm(): guarantee_online_mems()
> - old_mems_allowed: guarantee_online_mems()
>
> In cpuset_attach(),
> - cpuset_change_task_nodemask(): guarantee_online_mems()
> - mpol_rebind_mm(): effective_mems
> - cpuset_migrate_mm(): effective_mems
> - old_mems_allowed: effective_mems
>
> These inconsistencies dates back to quite a long time ago and it is
> hard to say what should be the correct values.
>
> The guarantee_online_mems() function returns a node mask from current or
> an ancestor cpuset that is a subset of node_states[N_MEMORY]. Nodes in
> node_states[N_MEMORY] are all online, i.e. in node_states[N_ONLINE].
> However, node in node_states[N_ONLINE] may not have memory. So
> node_states[N_MEMORY] should be a subset of node_states[N_ONLINE].
>
> The guarantee_online_mems() function should only be useful for v1 where
> mems_allowed is the same as effective_mems. With v2, the memory nodes
> in effective_mems should always be a subset of node_states[N_MEMORY].
> The only time that may not be true is when a memory hot-unplug operation
> is in progress and a memory node is removed from node_states[N_MEMORY]
> but not yet reflected in effective_mems as cpuset_handle_hotplug()
> has not yet been called from cpuset_track_online_nodes(). When
> cpuset_handle_hotplug() is called later, the memory node setting
> of the relevant cpusets and tasks will be updated. So replacing the
> guarantee_online_mems() call by just using cs->effective_mems should
> be fine.
>

I noticed this pattern in several places:

```
if (cpuset_v2())
newmems = cs->effective_mems;
else
guarantee_online_mems(cs, &newmems);
```

Would it be simpler to move the v2 logic into guarantee_online_mems?

```
static void guarantee_online_mems(struct cpuset *cs, nodemask_t *pmask)
{
if (cpuset_v2()) {
*pmask = cs->effective_mems;
return;
}
while (!nodes_and(*pmask, cs->effective_mems, node_states[N_MEMORY]))
cs = parent_cs(cs);
}
```

> Let use the following setup for both of them and make them consistent.
> - cpuset_change_task_nodemask(): guarantee_online_mems()
> - mpol_rebind_mm(): effective_mems
> - cpuset_migrate_mm(): guarantee_online_mems()
> - old_mems_allowed: guarantee_online_mems()
>
> So for v2, it is effectively all effective_mems. For v1, mpol_rebind_mm()
> uses cpus_allowed which may differ from what guarantee_online_mems()
^
mems_allowed?
> returns.
>
> Signed-off-by: Waiman Long <longman@xxxxxxxxxx>
> ---
> kernel/cgroup/cpuset.c | 32 +++++++++++++++++++++-----------
> 1 file changed, 21 insertions(+), 11 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/kernel/cgroup/cpuset.c b/kernel/cgroup/cpuset.c
> index 6bdb68689c24..987456b6d879 100644
> --- a/kernel/cgroup/cpuset.c
> +++ b/kernel/cgroup/cpuset.c
> @@ -2616,6 +2616,13 @@ static void *cpuset_being_rebound;
> * Iterate through each task of @cs updating its mems_allowed to the
> * effective cpuset's. As this function is called with cpuset_mutex held,
> * cpuset membership stays stable.
> + *
> + * - cpuset_change_task_nodemask(): guarantee_online_mems()
> + * - mpol_rebind_mm(): effective_mems
> + * - cpuset_migrate_mm(): guarantee_online_mems()
> + * - old_mems_allowed: guarantee_online_mems()
> + *
> + * For v2, guarantee_online_mems() should just return effective_mems.

I agree, but the implementation is not as simple as what I mentioned above.

> */
> void cpuset_update_tasks_nodemask(struct cpuset *cs)
> {
> @@ -2625,7 +2632,10 @@ void cpuset_update_tasks_nodemask(struct cpuset *cs)
>
> cpuset_being_rebound = cs; /* causes mpol_dup() rebind */
>
> - guarantee_online_mems(cs, &newmems);
> + if (cpuset_v2())
> + newmems = cs->effective_mems;
> + else
> + guarantee_online_mems(cs, &newmems);
>
> /*
> * The mpol_rebind_mm() call takes mmap_lock, which we couldn't
> @@ -2650,7 +2660,7 @@ void cpuset_update_tasks_nodemask(struct cpuset *cs)
>
> migrate = is_memory_migrate(cs);
>
> - mpol_rebind_mm(mm, &cs->mems_allowed);
> + mpol_rebind_mm(mm, &cs->effective_mems);
> if (migrate)
> cpuset_migrate_mm(mm, &cs->old_mems_allowed, &newmems);
> else
> @@ -3148,17 +3158,18 @@ static void cpuset_attach(struct cgroup_taskset *tset)
>
> /*
> * In the default hierarchy, enabling cpuset in the child cgroups
> - * will trigger a number of cpuset_attach() calls with no change
> - * in effective cpus and mems. In that case, we can optimize out
> - * by skipping the task iteration and update.
> + * will trigger a cpuset_attach() call with no change in effective cpus
> + * and mems. In that case, we can optimize out by skipping the task
> + * iteration and update.
> */
> - if (cpuset_v2() && !cpus_updated && !mems_updated) {
> + if (cpuset_v2()) {
> cpuset_attach_nodemask_to = cs->effective_mems;
> - goto out;
> + if (!cpus_updated && !mems_updated)
> + goto out;
> + } else {
> + guarantee_online_mems(cs, &cpuset_attach_nodemask_to);
> }
>
> - guarantee_online_mems(cs, &cpuset_attach_nodemask_to);
> -
> cgroup_taskset_for_each(task, css, tset)
> cpuset_attach_task(cs, task);
>
> @@ -3168,7 +3179,6 @@ static void cpuset_attach(struct cgroup_taskset *tset)
> * if there is no change in effective_mems and CS_MEMORY_MIGRATE is
> * not set.
> */
> - cpuset_attach_nodemask_to = cs->effective_mems;
> if (!is_memory_migrate(cs) && !mems_updated)
> goto out;
>
> @@ -3176,7 +3186,7 @@ static void cpuset_attach(struct cgroup_taskset *tset)
> struct mm_struct *mm = get_task_mm(leader);
>
> if (mm) {
> - mpol_rebind_mm(mm, &cpuset_attach_nodemask_to);
> + mpol_rebind_mm(mm, &cs->effective_mems);
>
> /*
> * old_mems_allowed is the same with mems_allowed

--
Best regards,
Ridong