Re: [PATCH v9 2/7] cpuset: Add new v2 cpuset.sched.domain_root flag

From: Waiman Long
Date: Wed May 30 2018 - 10:57:53 EST


On 05/30/2018 10:18 AM, Juri Lelli wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On 29/05/18 09:41, Waiman Long wrote:
>
> [...]
>
>> + cpuset.sched.domain_root
>> + A read-write single value file which exists on non-root
>> + cpuset-enabled cgroups. It is a binary value flag that accepts
>> + either "0" (off) or "1" (on). This flag is set by the parent
>> + and is not delegatable.
>> +
>> + If set, it indicates that the current cgroup is the root of a
>> + new scheduling domain or partition that comprises itself and
>> + all its descendants except those that are scheduling domain
>> + roots themselves and their descendants. The root cgroup is
>> + always a scheduling domain root.
>> +
>> + There are constraints on where this flag can be set. It can
>> + only be set in a cgroup if all the following conditions are true.
>> +
>> + 1) The "cpuset.cpus" is not empty and the list of CPUs are
>> + exclusive, i.e. they are not shared by any of its siblings.
>> + 2) The parent cgroup is also a scheduling domain root.
>> + 3) There is no child cgroups with cpuset enabled. This is
>> + for eliminating corner cases that have to be handled if such
>> + a condition is allowed.
>> +
>> + Setting this flag will take the CPUs away from the effective
>> + CPUs of the parent cgroup. Once it is set, this flag cannot
>> + be cleared if there are any child cgroups with cpuset enabled.
>> + Further changes made to "cpuset.cpus" is allowed as long as
>> + the first condition above is still true.
> IIUC, with the configuration below
>
> cpuset.cpus.effective:6-11
> cgroup.controllers:cpuset
> cpuset.mems.effective:0-1
> cgroup.subtree_control:cpuset
> g1/cpuset.cpus.effective:0-5
> g1/cgroup.controllers:cpuset
> g1/cpuset.sched.load_balance:1
> g1/cpuset.mems.effective:0-1
> g1/cpuset.cpus:0-5
> g1/cpuset.sched.domain_root:1
> user.slice/cpuset.cpus.effective:6-11
> user.slice/cgroup.controllers:cpuset
> user.slice/cpuset.sched.load_balance:1
> user.slice/cpuset.mems.effective:0-1
> user.slice/cpuset.cpus:6-11
> user.slice/cpuset.sched.domain_root:0
> init.scope/cpuset.cpus.effective:6-11
> init.scope/cgroup.controllers:cpuset
> init.scope/cpuset.sched.load_balance:1
> init.scope/cpuset.mems.effective:0-1
> init.scope/cpuset.cpus:6-11
> init.scope/cpuset.sched.domain_root:0
> system.slice/cpuset.cpus.effective:6-11
> system.slice/cgroup.controllers:cpuset
> system.slice/cpuset.sched.load_balance:1
> system.slice/cpuset.mems.effective:0-1
> system.slice/cpuset.cpus:6-11
> system.slice/cpuset.sched.domain_root:0
> machine.slice/cpuset.cpus.effective:6-11
> machine.slice/cgroup.controllers:cpuset
> machine.slice/cpuset.sched.load_balance:1
> machine.slice/cpuset.mems.effective:0-1
> machine.slice/cpuset.cpus:6-11
> machine.slice/cpuset.sched.domain_root:0
>
> I should be able to
>
> # echo 0-4 >g1/cpuset.cpus
>
> ?
>
> It doesn't let me.

It should allow that. I will fix this issue.

>
> I'm not sure we actually want to allow that, but that's what would I
> expect as per your text above.
>
> Thanks,
>
> - Juri
>
> BTW: thanks a lot for your prompt feedback and hope it's OK if I keep
> playing and asking questions. :)

Of course. I appreciate your help in looking for issue in the patch that
I might have overlooked.

Thanks,
Longman