On 06/18/2018 10:20 PM, Juri Lelli wrote:

Hi,

On 18/06/18 12:13, Waiman Long wrote:

quoted

v10:
 - Remove the cpuset.sched.load_balance patch for now as it may not
   be that useful.
 - Break the large patch 2 into smaller patches to make them a bit
   easier to review.
 - Test and fix issues related to changing "cpuset.cpus" and cpu
   online/offline in a domain root.
 - Rename isolated_cpus to reserved_cpus as this cpumask holds CPUs
   reserved for child sched domains.
 - Rework the scheduling domain debug printing code in the last patch.
 - Document update to the newly moved
   Documentation/admin-guide/cgroup-v2.rst.

There seem to be two (similar but different) 6/9 in the set. Something
went wrong?

The isolated_cpus patch is old, I forgot to remove it before sending out
the patch.

Also I can't seem to be able to create a subgroup with an isolated
domain root. I think that, when doing the following

 # mount -t cgroup2 none /sys/fs/cgroup
 # echo "+cpuset" >/sys/fs/cgroup/cgroup.subtree_control 
 # mkdir /sys/fs/cgroup/g1
 # echo 0-1 >/sys/fs/cgroup/g1/cpuset.cpus
 # echo 1 >/sys/fs/cgroup/g1/cpuset.sched.domain_root

rebuild_sched_domains_locked exits early, since
top_cpuset.effective_cpus != cpu_active_mask. (effective_cpus being 2-3
at this point since I'm testing this on a 0-3 system)

In your v9 this [1] was adding a special condition to make rebuilding of
domains happen. Was the change intentional?

Can you reply to the relevant patch to pinpoint what condition are you
talking about? I do try to eliminate domain rebuild as much as possible,
but I am just not sure which condition you have question about.

Cheers,
Longman