On 29/03/2023 16:31, Waiman Long wrote:
On 3/29/23 10:25, Waiman Long wrote:[...]
On 3/29/23 08:55, Juri Lelli wrote:
From: Dietmar Eggemann <dietmar.eggemann@xxxxxxx>
Many thanks for the review!Another nit that I have is that you may have to record also the cpu@@ -2518,11 +2547,21 @@ static int cpuset_can_attach(struct
cgroup_taskset *tset)
static void cpuset_cancel_attach(struct cgroup_taskset *tset)
{
struct cgroup_subsys_state *css;
+ struct cpuset *cs;
cgroup_taskset_first(tset, &css);
+ cs = css_cs(css);
mutex_lock(&cpuset_mutex);
- css_cs(css)->attach_in_progress--;
+ cs->attach_in_progress--;
+
+ if (cs->nr_migrate_dl_tasks) {
+ int cpu = cpumask_any(cs->effective_cpus);
+
+ dl_bw_free(cpu, cs->sum_migrate_dl_bw);
+ reset_migrate_dl_data(cs);
+ }
+
where the DL bandwidth is allocated in cpuset_can_attach() and free the
bandwidth back into that cpu or there can be an underflow if another cpu
is chosen.
But isn't the DL BW control `struct dl_bw` per `struct root_domain`
which is per exclusive cpuset. So as long cpu is from
`cs->effective_cpus` shouldn't this be fine?