On 2025/11/13 22:57, Waiman Long wrote:
>On 11/13/25 8:14 AM, Sun Shaojie wrote:
>> ...
>> diff --git a/kernel/cgroup/cpuset.c b/kernel/cgroup/cpuset.c
>> index 52468d2c178a..3240b3ab5998 100644
>> --- a/kernel/cgroup/cpuset.c
>> +++ b/kernel/cgroup/cpuset.c
>> @@ -592,8 +592,13 @@ static inline bool cpusets_are_exclusive(struct cpuset
>> *cs1, struct cpuset *cs2)
>> */
>> static inline bool cpus_excl_conflict(struct cpuset *cs1, struct cpuset
>> *cs2)
>> {
>> - /* If either cpuset is exclusive, check if they are mutually exclusive
>> */
>> - if (is_cpu_exclusive(cs1) || is_cpu_exclusive(cs2))
>> + /* If both cpusets are exclusive, check if they are mutually exclusive
>> */
>> + if (is_cpu_exclusive(cs1) && is_cpu_exclusive(cs2))
>> + return !cpusets_are_exclusive(cs1, cs2);
>> +
>> + /* In cgroup-v1, if either cpuset is exclusive, check if they are
>> mutually exclusive */
>> + if (!is_in_v2_mode() &&
>
>You should just use cpuset_v2() here as is_in_v2_mode() checks an
>additional v1 specific mode that is irrelevant wrt to exclusive bit
>handling. Also please update the functional comment about difference in
>v1 vs. v2 behavior.
>
>Note that we may have to update other conflict checking code in cpuset.c
>to make this new behavior more consistent.
>
>Thanks,
>Longman
>
>> + (is_cpu_exclusive(cs1) != is_cpu_exclusive(cs2)))
>> return !cpusets_are_exclusive(cs1, cs2);
>>
>> /* Exclusive_cpus cannot intersect */
Thank you for the correction.I will update the patch accordingly.
Tnanks,
Sun Shaojie
