2023-03-31 14:53:30

by Waiman Long

[permalink] [raw]
Subject: [PATCH 0/3] cgroup/cpuset: Fix CLONE_INTO_CGROUP problem & other issues

The first patch of this series fixes the incorrect cpumask problem
when the CLONE_INTO_CGROUP flag is used to clone a child to a different
cgroup. It also includes 2 other miscellaneous fixes to the cpuset code.

Waiman Long (3):
cgroup/cpuset: Make cpuset_fork() handle CLONE_INTO_CGROUP properly
cgroup/cpuset: Make cpuset_attach_task() skip subpartitions CPUs for
top_cpuset
cgroup/cpuset: Allow only one active attach operation per cpuset

kernel/cgroup/cpuset.c | 76 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++--------------
1 file changed, 51 insertions(+), 25 deletions(-)

--
2.31.1


2023-03-31 14:53:34

by Waiman Long

[permalink] [raw]
Subject: [PATCH 3/3] cgroup/cpuset: Allow only one active attach operation per cpuset

The current cpuset code uses the global cpuset_attach_old_cs variable
to store the old cpuset value between consecutive cpuset_can_attach()
and cpuset_attach() calls. Since a caller of cpuset_can_attach() may
not need to hold the global cgroup_threadgroup_rwsem, parallel cpuset
attach operations are possible.

When there are concurrent cpuset attach operations in progress,
cpuset_attach() may fetch the wrong value from cpuset_attach_old_cs
causing incorrect result. To avoid this problem while still allowing
certain level of parallelism, drop cpuset_attach_old_cs and use a
per-cpuset attach_old_cs value. Also restrict to at most one active
attach operation per cpuset to avoid corrupting the value of the
per-cpuset attach_old_cs value.

Signed-off-by: Waiman Long <[email protected]>
---
kernel/cgroup/cpuset.c | 19 ++++++++++++++-----
1 file changed, 14 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)

diff --git a/kernel/cgroup/cpuset.c b/kernel/cgroup/cpuset.c
index 2367de611c42..3f925c261513 100644
--- a/kernel/cgroup/cpuset.c
+++ b/kernel/cgroup/cpuset.c
@@ -198,6 +198,8 @@ struct cpuset {

/* Handle for cpuset.cpus.partition */
struct cgroup_file partition_file;
+
+ struct cpuset *attach_old_cs;
};

/*
@@ -2456,22 +2458,27 @@ static int fmeter_getrate(struct fmeter *fmp)
return val;
}

-static struct cpuset *cpuset_attach_old_cs;
-
/* Called by cgroups to determine if a cpuset is usable; cpuset_rwsem held */
static int cpuset_can_attach(struct cgroup_taskset *tset)
{
struct cgroup_subsys_state *css;
- struct cpuset *cs;
+ struct cpuset *cs, *oldcs;
struct task_struct *task;
int ret;

/* used later by cpuset_attach() */
- cpuset_attach_old_cs = task_cs(cgroup_taskset_first(tset, &css));
+ oldcs = task_cs(cgroup_taskset_first(tset, &css));
cs = css_cs(css);

percpu_down_write(&cpuset_rwsem);

+ /*
+ * Only one cpuset attach operation is allowed for each cpuset.
+ */
+ ret = -EBUSY;
+ if (cs->attach_in_progress)
+ goto out_unlock;
+
/* allow moving tasks into an empty cpuset if on default hierarchy */
ret = -ENOSPC;
if (!is_in_v2_mode() &&
@@ -2498,6 +2505,7 @@ static int cpuset_can_attach(struct cgroup_taskset *tset)
* changes which zero cpus/mems_allowed.
*/
cs->attach_in_progress++;
+ cs->attach_old_cs = oldcs;
ret = 0;
out_unlock:
percpu_up_write(&cpuset_rwsem);
@@ -2548,7 +2556,7 @@ static void cpuset_attach(struct cgroup_taskset *tset)
struct task_struct *leader;
struct cgroup_subsys_state *css;
struct cpuset *cs;
- struct cpuset *oldcs = cpuset_attach_old_cs;
+ struct cpuset *oldcs;
bool cpus_updated, mems_updated;

cgroup_taskset_first(tset, &css);
@@ -2556,6 +2564,7 @@ static void cpuset_attach(struct cgroup_taskset *tset)

lockdep_assert_cpus_held(); /* see cgroup_attach_lock() */
percpu_down_write(&cpuset_rwsem);
+ oldcs = cs->attach_old_cs;
cpus_updated = !cpumask_equal(cs->effective_cpus,
oldcs->effective_cpus);
mems_updated = !nodes_equal(cs->effective_mems, oldcs->effective_mems);
--
2.31.1

2023-03-31 14:53:38

by Waiman Long

[permalink] [raw]
Subject: [PATCH 2/3] cgroup/cpuset: Make cpuset_attach_task() skip subpartitions CPUs for top_cpuset

It is found that attaching a task to the top_cpuset does not currently
ignore CPUs allocated to subpartitions in cpuset_attach_task(). So the
code is changed to fix that.

Signed-off-by: Waiman Long <[email protected]>
---
kernel/cgroup/cpuset.c | 3 ++-
1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)

diff --git a/kernel/cgroup/cpuset.c b/kernel/cgroup/cpuset.c
index f6d5614982d7..2367de611c42 100644
--- a/kernel/cgroup/cpuset.c
+++ b/kernel/cgroup/cpuset.c
@@ -2530,7 +2530,8 @@ static void cpuset_attach_task(struct cpuset *cs, struct task_struct *task)
if (cs != &top_cpuset)
guarantee_online_cpus(task, cpus_attach);
else
- cpumask_copy(cpus_attach, task_cpu_possible_mask(task));
+ cpumask_andnot(cpus_attach, task_cpu_possible_mask(task),
+ cs->subparts_cpus);
/*
* can_attach beforehand should guarantee that this doesn't
* fail. TODO: have a better way to handle failure here
--
2.31.1

2023-03-31 14:53:44

by Waiman Long

[permalink] [raw]
Subject: [PATCH 1/3] cgroup/cpuset: Make cpuset_fork() handle CLONE_INTO_CGROUP properly

By default, the clone(2) syscall spawn a child process into the same
cgroup as its parent. With the use of the CLONE_INTO_CGROUP flag
introduced by commit ef2c41cf38a7 ("clone3: allow spawning processes
into cgroups"), the child will be spawned into a different cgroup which
is somewhat similar to writing the child's tid into "cgroup.threads".

The current cpuset_fork() method does not properly handle the
CLONE_INTO_CGROUP case where the cpuset of the child may be different
from that of its parent. Update the cpuset_fork() method to treat the
CLONE_INTO_CGROUP case similar to cpuset_attach().

Since the newly cloned task has not been running yet, its actual
memory usage isn't known. So it is not necessary to make change to mm
in cpuset_fork().

Fixes: ef2c41cf38a7 ("clone3: allow spawning processes into cgroups")
Signed-off-by: Waiman Long <[email protected]>
---
kernel/cgroup/cpuset.c | 56 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++---------------
1 file changed, 36 insertions(+), 20 deletions(-)

diff --git a/kernel/cgroup/cpuset.c b/kernel/cgroup/cpuset.c
index bc4dcfd7bee5..f6d5614982d7 100644
--- a/kernel/cgroup/cpuset.c
+++ b/kernel/cgroup/cpuset.c
@@ -2516,16 +2516,33 @@ static void cpuset_cancel_attach(struct cgroup_taskset *tset)
}

/*
- * Protected by cpuset_rwsem. cpus_attach is used only by cpuset_attach()
+ * Protected by cpuset_rwsem. cpus_attach is used only by cpuset_attach_task()
* but we can't allocate it dynamically there. Define it global and
* allocate from cpuset_init().
*/
static cpumask_var_t cpus_attach;
+static nodemask_t cpuset_attach_nodemask_to;
+
+static void cpuset_attach_task(struct cpuset *cs, struct task_struct *task)
+{
+ percpu_rwsem_assert_held(&cpuset_rwsem);
+
+ if (cs != &top_cpuset)
+ guarantee_online_cpus(task, cpus_attach);
+ else
+ cpumask_copy(cpus_attach, task_cpu_possible_mask(task));
+ /*
+ * can_attach beforehand should guarantee that this doesn't
+ * fail. TODO: have a better way to handle failure here
+ */
+ WARN_ON_ONCE(set_cpus_allowed_ptr(task, cpus_attach));
+
+ cpuset_change_task_nodemask(task, &cpuset_attach_nodemask_to);
+ cpuset_update_task_spread_flags(cs, task);
+}

static void cpuset_attach(struct cgroup_taskset *tset)
{
- /* static buf protected by cpuset_rwsem */
- static nodemask_t cpuset_attach_nodemask_to;
struct task_struct *task;
struct task_struct *leader;
struct cgroup_subsys_state *css;
@@ -2556,20 +2573,8 @@ static void cpuset_attach(struct cgroup_taskset *tset)

guarantee_online_mems(cs, &cpuset_attach_nodemask_to);

- cgroup_taskset_for_each(task, css, tset) {
- if (cs != &top_cpuset)
- guarantee_online_cpus(task, cpus_attach);
- else
- cpumask_copy(cpus_attach, task_cpu_possible_mask(task));
- /*
- * can_attach beforehand should guarantee that this doesn't
- * fail. TODO: have a better way to handle failure here
- */
- WARN_ON_ONCE(set_cpus_allowed_ptr(task, cpus_attach));
-
- cpuset_change_task_nodemask(task, &cpuset_attach_nodemask_to);
- cpuset_update_task_spread_flags(cs, task);
- }
+ cgroup_taskset_for_each(task, css, tset)
+ cpuset_attach_task(cs, task);

/*
* Change mm for all threadgroup leaders. This is expensive and may
@@ -3267,11 +3272,22 @@ static void cpuset_bind(struct cgroup_subsys_state *root_css)
*/
static void cpuset_fork(struct task_struct *task)
{
- if (task_css_is_root(task, cpuset_cgrp_id))
+ struct cpuset *cs = task_cs(task);
+
+ if (cs == task_cs(current)) {
+ if (cs == &top_cpuset)
+ return;
+
+ set_cpus_allowed_ptr(task, current->cpus_ptr);
+ task->mems_allowed = current->mems_allowed;
return;
+ }

- set_cpus_allowed_ptr(task, current->cpus_ptr);
- task->mems_allowed = current->mems_allowed;
+ /* CLONE_INTO_CGROUP */
+ percpu_down_write(&cpuset_rwsem);
+ guarantee_online_mems(cs, &cpuset_attach_nodemask_to);
+ cpuset_attach_task(cs, task);
+ percpu_up_write(&cpuset_rwsem);
}

struct cgroup_subsys cpuset_cgrp_subsys = {
--
2.31.1

2023-04-03 16:51:36

by Michal Koutný

[permalink] [raw]
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/3] cgroup/cpuset: Make cpuset_attach_task() skip subpartitions CPUs for top_cpuset

Hi.

On Fri, Mar 31, 2023 at 10:50:44AM -0400, Waiman Long <[email protected]> wrote:
> It is found that attaching a task to the top_cpuset does not currently
> ignore CPUs allocated to subpartitions in cpuset_attach_task(). So the
> code is changed to fix that.
>
> Signed-off-by: Waiman Long <[email protected]>
> ---
> kernel/cgroup/cpuset.c | 3 ++-
> 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)

Reviewed-by: Michal Koutn? <[email protected]>


Attachments:
(No filename) (467.00 B)
signature.asc (235.00 B)
Download all attachments

2023-04-03 17:05:08

by Michal Koutný

[permalink] [raw]
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/3] cgroup/cpuset: Make cpuset_fork() handle CLONE_INTO_CGROUP properly

On Fri, Mar 31, 2023 at 10:50:43AM -0400, Waiman Long <[email protected]> wrote:
> By default, the clone(2) syscall spawn a child process into the same
> cgroup as its parent. With the use of the CLONE_INTO_CGROUP flag
> introduced by commit ef2c41cf38a7 ("clone3: allow spawning processes
> into cgroups"), the child will be spawned into a different cgroup which
> is somewhat similar to writing the child's tid into "cgroup.threads".
>
> The current cpuset_fork() method does not properly handle the
> CLONE_INTO_CGROUP case where the cpuset of the child may be different
> from that of its parent. Update the cpuset_fork() method to treat the
> CLONE_INTO_CGROUP case similar to cpuset_attach().

Should .can_fork=cpuset_can_fork in analogy to cpuset_can_attach be also
devised? (Sorry if I missed that in the previous discussion.)

>
> Since the newly cloned task has not been running yet, its actual
> memory usage isn't known. So it is not necessary to make change to mm
> in cpuset_fork().
>
> Fixes: ef2c41cf38a7 ("clone3: allow spawning processes into cgroups")
> Signed-off-by: Waiman Long <[email protected]>

Thanks,
Michal


Attachments:
(No filename) (1.14 kB)
signature.asc (235.00 B)
Download all attachments

2023-04-03 17:09:39

by Michal Koutný

[permalink] [raw]
Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/3] cgroup/cpuset: Allow only one active attach operation per cpuset

On Fri, Mar 31, 2023 at 10:50:45AM -0400, Waiman Long <[email protected]> wrote:
> The current cpuset code uses the global cpuset_attach_old_cs variable
> to store the old cpuset value between consecutive cpuset_can_attach()
> and cpuset_attach() calls. Since a caller of cpuset_can_attach() may
> not need to hold the global cgroup_threadgroup_rwsem, parallel cpuset
> attach operations are possible.

Do I understand correctly this consequence of the cpuset_attach_task()
on the clone path?
In that particular case (with CLONE_INTO_CGROUP) cgroup_mutex is taken,
so the access the the old_cs variable should still be synchronized with
regular migrations that are also under cgroup_mutex.


> When there are concurrent cpuset attach operations in progress,
> cpuset_attach() may fetch the wrong value from cpuset_attach_old_cs
> causing incorrect result. To avoid this problem while still allowing
> certain level of parallelism, drop cpuset_attach_old_cs and use a
> per-cpuset attach_old_cs value. Also restrict to at most one active
> attach operation per cpuset to avoid corrupting the value of the
> per-cpuset attach_old_cs value.

Secondly, semantically wouldn't a `void *ss_priv[CGROUP_SUBSYS_COUNT]`
in struct cgroup_taskset make it simpler wrt the exclusivity guarantees?

Thirdly, if my initial assumptino is right -- I'd suggest ordering this
before the patch `cgroup/cpuset: Make cpuset_fork() handle
CLONE_INTO_CGROUP properly` to spare backporters possible troubles if
this is would be a fixup to that.


Thanks,
Michal


Attachments:
(No filename) (1.53 kB)
signature.asc (235.00 B)
Download all attachments

2023-04-03 17:22:20

by Waiman Long

[permalink] [raw]
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/3] cgroup/cpuset: Make cpuset_fork() handle CLONE_INTO_CGROUP properly


On 4/3/23 12:55, Michal Koutný wrote:
> On Fri, Mar 31, 2023 at 10:50:43AM -0400, Waiman Long <[email protected]> wrote:
>> By default, the clone(2) syscall spawn a child process into the same
>> cgroup as its parent. With the use of the CLONE_INTO_CGROUP flag
>> introduced by commit ef2c41cf38a7 ("clone3: allow spawning processes
>> into cgroups"), the child will be spawned into a different cgroup which
>> is somewhat similar to writing the child's tid into "cgroup.threads".
>>
>> The current cpuset_fork() method does not properly handle the
>> CLONE_INTO_CGROUP case where the cpuset of the child may be different
>> from that of its parent. Update the cpuset_fork() method to treat the
>> CLONE_INTO_CGROUP case similar to cpuset_attach().
> Should .can_fork=cpuset_can_fork in analogy to cpuset_can_attach be also
> devised? (Sorry if I missed that in the previous discussion.)

I have thought about that too.

However, the can_attach method checks only a couple of things:

1) PF_NO_SETAFFINITY flag - which won't be set in the case of fork() as
it is for kthread only.
2) DL bandwidth - Juri has a cpuset outstanding to modify the way this
check is being done. I want to wait until it is settled before tackling
this, if necessary.
3) security_task_setscheduler() - the CLONE_INTO_CGROUP code has already
checked that, we don't need to duplicate the check.

So we don't need a can_fork() check for now.

Cheers,
Longman

2023-04-03 17:37:51

by Waiman Long

[permalink] [raw]
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/3] cgroup/cpuset: Make cpuset_fork() handle CLONE_INTO_CGROUP properly


On 4/3/23 13:18, Waiman Long wrote:
>
> On 4/3/23 12:55, Michal Koutný wrote:
>> On Fri, Mar 31, 2023 at 10:50:43AM -0400, Waiman Long
>> <[email protected]> wrote:
>>> By default, the clone(2) syscall spawn a child process into the same
>>> cgroup as its parent. With the use of the CLONE_INTO_CGROUP flag
>>> introduced by commit ef2c41cf38a7 ("clone3: allow spawning processes
>>> into cgroups"), the child will be spawned into a different cgroup which
>>> is somewhat similar to writing the child's tid into "cgroup.threads".
>>>
>>> The current cpuset_fork() method does not properly handle the
>>> CLONE_INTO_CGROUP case where the cpuset of the child may be different
>>> from that of its parent.  Update the cpuset_fork() method to treat the
>>> CLONE_INTO_CGROUP case similar to cpuset_attach().
>> Should .can_fork=cpuset_can_fork in analogy to cpuset_can_attach be also
>> devised? (Sorry if I missed that in the previous discussion.)
>
> I have thought about that too.
>
> However, the can_attach method checks only a couple of things:
>
> 1) PF_NO_SETAFFINITY flag - which won't be set in the case of fork()
> as it is for kthread only.
> 2) DL bandwidth - Juri has a cpuset outstanding to modify the way this
> check is being done. I want to wait until it is settled before
> tackling this, if necessary.

BTW, even cloning without CLONE_INTO_CGROUP can be an issue WRT DL
bandwidth. So I will let the scheduler folk figure out what to do with that.

Cheers,
Longman

2023-04-03 17:45:33

by Waiman Long

[permalink] [raw]
Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/3] cgroup/cpuset: Allow only one active attach operation per cpuset


On 4/3/23 12:47, Michal Koutný wrote:
> On Fri, Mar 31, 2023 at 10:50:45AM -0400, Waiman Long <[email protected]> wrote:
>> The current cpuset code uses the global cpuset_attach_old_cs variable
>> to store the old cpuset value between consecutive cpuset_can_attach()
>> and cpuset_attach() calls. Since a caller of cpuset_can_attach() may
>> not need to hold the global cgroup_threadgroup_rwsem, parallel cpuset
>> attach operations are possible.
> Do I understand correctly this consequence of the cpuset_attach_task()
> on the clone path?
> In that particular case (with CLONE_INTO_CGROUP) cgroup_mutex is taken,
> so the access the the old_cs variable should still be synchronized with
> regular migrations that are also under cgroup_mutex.

This patch is actually not related to the CLONE_INTO_GROUP problem in
patch 1. It is a generic problem when multiple users are moving threads
into cgroup.threads of the same or different cpusets simultaneously.


>> When there are concurrent cpuset attach operations in progress,
>> cpuset_attach() may fetch the wrong value from cpuset_attach_old_cs
>> causing incorrect result. To avoid this problem while still allowing
>> certain level of parallelism, drop cpuset_attach_old_cs and use a
>> per-cpuset attach_old_cs value. Also restrict to at most one active
>> attach operation per cpuset to avoid corrupting the value of the
>> per-cpuset attach_old_cs value.
> Secondly, semantically wouldn't a `void *ss_priv[CGROUP_SUBSYS_COUNT]`
> in struct cgroup_taskset make it simpler wrt the exclusivity guarantees?

I guess we can put the old_cs value into cgroup_taskset. Since the
related attach_in_progress value is in cpuset, so I put the old_cs there
too.


> Thirdly, if my initial assumptino is right -- I'd suggest ordering this
> before the patch `cgroup/cpuset: Make cpuset_fork() handle
> CLONE_INTO_CGROUP properly` to spare backporters possible troubles if
> this is would be a fixup to that.

I don't believe this patch has a dependency on patch 1.

I had thought about adding a fixes tag so it will be backported to
stable. However, this problem should be rare. Let's see what others
think about it.

Cheers,
Longman

2023-04-04 09:13:23

by Michal Koutný

[permalink] [raw]
Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/3] cgroup/cpuset: Allow only one active attach operation per cpuset

Hi.

On Mon, Apr 03, 2023 at 01:41:33PM -0400, Waiman Long <[email protected]> wrote:
> This patch is actually not related to the CLONE_INTO_GROUP problem in patch
> 1. It is a generic problem when multiple users are moving threads into
> cgroup.threads of the same or different cpusets simultaneously.

I meant this:
__cgroup_procs_write
cgroup_kn_lock_live
mutex_lock(&cgroup_mutex)

and (more succintly)
cgroup_update_dfl_csses
lockdep_assert_held(&cgroup_mutex)

Even the threaded migrations should be synchronized here.
Can you please explain in more detail what's the problematic case?

> I don't believe this patch has a dependency on patch 1.

(I meant the opposite, patch 1 would depend in this 3/3. But maybe this
one isn't need.)

Michal


Attachments:
(No filename) (788.00 B)
signature.asc (235.00 B)
Download all attachments

2023-04-04 09:31:36

by Michal Koutný

[permalink] [raw]
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/3] cgroup/cpuset: Make cpuset_fork() handle CLONE_INTO_CGROUP properly

On Mon, Apr 03, 2023 at 01:18:42PM -0400, Waiman Long <[email protected]> wrote:
> 1) PF_NO_SETAFFINITY flag - which won't be set in the case of fork() as it
> is for kthread only.
> 2) DL bandwidth - Juri has a cpuset outstanding to modify the way this check
> is being done. I want to wait until it is settled before tackling this, if
> necessary.

BTW what about CLONE_INTO_CGROUP where the target cpuset has empty
effective cpuset?

> 3) security_task_setscheduler() - the CLONE_INTO_CGROUP code has already
> checked that, we don't need to duplicate the check.

Not sure what this refers to.

> So we don't need a can_fork() check for now.

Anyway, good breakdown. Could you please add it to the commit message
too?

Regards,
Michal


Attachments:
(No filename) (761.00 B)
signature.asc (235.00 B)
Download all attachments

2023-04-04 13:55:33

by Waiman Long

[permalink] [raw]
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/3] cgroup/cpuset: Make cpuset_fork() handle CLONE_INTO_CGROUP properly


On 4/4/23 05:19, Michal Koutný wrote:
> On Mon, Apr 03, 2023 at 01:18:42PM -0400, Waiman Long <[email protected]> wrote:
>> 1) PF_NO_SETAFFINITY flag - which won't be set in the case of fork() as it
>> is for kthread only.
>> 2) DL bandwidth - Juri has a cpuset outstanding to modify the way this check
>> is being done. I want to wait until it is settled before tackling this, if
>> necessary.
> BTW what about CLONE_INTO_CGROUP where the target cpuset has empty
> effective cpuset?
Good point. That will require a can_fork() method then. I will look into
that.
>
>> 3) security_task_setscheduler() - the CLONE_INTO_CGROUP code has already
>> checked that, we don't need to duplicate the check.
> Not sure what this refers to.
It is just checking of the task the has privilege of running into that
cgroup.
>
>> So we don't need a can_fork() check for now.
> Anyway, good breakdown. Could you please add it to the commit message
> too?

Yes, I can put that into the commit log.

Cheers,
Longman

> Regards,
> Michal

2023-04-04 14:22:34

by Waiman Long

[permalink] [raw]
Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/3] cgroup/cpuset: Allow only one active attach operation per cpuset


On 4/4/23 05:07, Michal Koutný wrote:
> Hi.
>
> On Mon, Apr 03, 2023 at 01:41:33PM -0400, Waiman Long <[email protected]> wrote:
>> This patch is actually not related to the CLONE_INTO_GROUP problem in patch
>> 1. It is a generic problem when multiple users are moving threads into
>> cgroup.threads of the same or different cpusets simultaneously.
> I meant this:
> __cgroup_procs_write
> cgroup_kn_lock_live
> mutex_lock(&cgroup_mutex)
>
> and (more succintly)
> cgroup_update_dfl_csses
> lockdep_assert_held(&cgroup_mutex)
>
> Even the threaded migrations should be synchronized here.
> Can you please explain in more detail what's the problematic case?

You are right. I missed the cgroup_mutex synchronization here. So this
patch isn't needed. I will drop it in the next version.

Cheers,
Longman

2023-04-04 17:54:15

by Waiman Long

[permalink] [raw]
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/3] cgroup/cpuset: Make cpuset_fork() handle CLONE_INTO_CGROUP properly

On 4/4/23 09:52, Waiman Long wrote:
>
> On 4/4/23 05:19, Michal Koutný wrote:
>> On Mon, Apr 03, 2023 at 01:18:42PM -0400, Waiman Long
>> <[email protected]> wrote:
>>> 1) PF_NO_SETAFFINITY flag - which won't be set in the case of fork()
>>> as it
>>> is for kthread only.
>>> 2) DL bandwidth - Juri has a cpuset outstanding to modify the way
>>> this check
>>> is being done. I want to wait until it is settled before tackling
>>> this, if
>>> necessary.
>> BTW what about CLONE_INTO_CGROUP where the target cpuset has empty
>> effective cpuset?
> Good point. That will require a can_fork() method then. I will look
> into that.
>>
>>> 3) security_task_setscheduler() - the CLONE_INTO_CGROUP code has
>>> already
>>> checked that, we don't need to duplicate the check.
>> Not sure what this refers to.
> It is just checking of the task the has privilege of running into that
> cgroup.
>>
>>> So we don't need a can_fork() check for now.
>> Anyway, good breakdown. Could you please add it to the commit message
>> too?
>
> Yes, I can put that into the commit log.

I decide to add the can_fork method to do a pre-check. So I don't think
I need to update the commit log of this patch.

Cheers,
Longman

2023-04-06 02:59:02

by Yujie Liu

[permalink] [raw]
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/3] cgroup/cpuset: Make cpuset_fork() handle CLONE_INTO_CGROUP properly

Hello,

kernel test robot noticed "WARNING:suspicious_RCU_usage" on:

commit: a53ab2ba098e6839db602212831c8b62a38c2956 ("[PATCH 1/3] cgroup/cpuset: Make cpuset_fork() handle CLONE_INTO_CGROUP properly")
url: https://github.com/intel-lab-lkp/linux/commits/Waiman-Long/cgroup-cpuset-Make-cpuset_fork-handle-CLONE_INTO_CGROUP-properly/20230331-225527
base: https://git.kernel.org/cgit/linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux.git 62bad54b26db8bc98e28749cd76b2d890edb4258
patch link: https://lore.kernel.org/all/[email protected]/
patch subject: [PATCH 1/3] cgroup/cpuset: Make cpuset_fork() handle CLONE_INTO_CGROUP properly

in testcase: boot

compiler: gcc-11
test machine: qemu-system-x86_64 -enable-kvm -cpu SandyBridge -smp 2 -m 16G

(please refer to attached dmesg/kmsg for entire log/backtrace)


If you fix the issue, kindly add following tag
| Reported-by: kernel test robot <[email protected]>
| Link: https://lore.kernel.org/oe-lkp/[email protected]


[ 2.798551][ T2] WARNING: suspicious RCU usage
[ 2.799473][ T2] 6.3.0-rc4-00162-ga53ab2ba098e #1 Not tainted
[ 2.799901][ T2] -----------------------------
[ 2.800551][ T2] include/linux/cgroup.h:437 suspicious rcu_dereference_check() usage!
[ 2.802044][ T2]
[ 2.802044][ T2] other info that might help us debug this:
[ 2.802044][ T2]
[ 2.803158][ T2]
[ 2.803158][ T2] rcu_scheduler_active = 1, debug_locks = 1
[ 2.804024][ T2] 1 lock held by kthreadd/2:
[ 2.804851][ T2] #0: ffffffff84c38230 (cgroup_threadgroup_rwsem){.+.+}-{0:0}, at: cgroup_can_fork (kernel/cgroup/cgroup.c:6515)
[ 2.806112][ T2]
[ 2.806112][ T2] stack backtrace:
[ 2.806958][ T2] CPU: 0 PID: 2 Comm: kthreadd Not tainted 6.3.0-rc4-00162-ga53ab2ba098e #1
[ 2.807537][ T2] Hardware name: QEMU Standard PC (i440FX + PIIX, 1996), BIOS 1.16.0-debian-1.16.0-5 04/01/2014
[ 2.807537][ T2] Call Trace:
[ 2.807537][ T2] <TASK>
[ 2.807537][ T2] dump_stack_lvl (lib/dump_stack.c:107)
[ 2.807537][ T2] lockdep_rcu_suspicious (include/linux/context_tracking.h:153 kernel/locking/lockdep.c:6600)
[ 2.807537][ T2] cpuset_fork (include/linux/cgroup.h:437 kernel/cgroup/cpuset.c:240 kernel/cgroup/cpuset.c:3262)
[ 2.807537][ T2] cgroup_post_fork (kernel/cgroup/cgroup.c:6635 (discriminator 6))
[ 2.807537][ T2] ? cgroup_cancel_fork (kernel/cgroup/cgroup.c:6573)
[ 2.807537][ T2] ? mark_held_locks (kernel/locking/lockdep.c:4237)
[ 2.807537][ T2] ? lockdep_hardirqs_on_prepare (kernel/locking/lockdep.c:4529)
[ 2.807537][ T2] copy_process (kernel/fork.c:2499)
[ 2.807537][ T2] ? __cleanup_sighand (kernel/fork.c:2013)
[ 2.807537][ T2] ? __lock_acquire (kernel/locking/lockdep.c:186 kernel/locking/lockdep.c:3836 kernel/locking/lockdep.c:5056)
[ 2.807537][ T2] kernel_clone (include/linux/random.h:26 kernel/fork.c:2680)
[ 2.807537][ T2] ? create_io_thread (kernel/fork.c:2639)
[ 2.807537][ T2] ? mark_usage (kernel/locking/lockdep.c:4914)
[ 2.807537][ T2] ? finish_task_switch+0x21c/0x910
[ 2.807537][ T2] ? __switch_to (arch/x86/include/asm/bitops.h:55 include/asm-generic/bitops/instrumented-atomic.h:29 include/linux/thread_info.h:89 arch/x86/include/asm/fpu/sched.h:65 arch/x86/kernel/process_64.c:623)
[ 2.807537][ T2] kernel_thread (kernel/fork.c:2729)
[ 2.807537][ T2] ? __ia32_sys_clone3 (kernel/fork.c:2729)
[ 2.807537][ T2] ? lock_downgrade (kernel/locking/lockdep.c:5321)
[ 2.807537][ T2] ? kthread_complete_and_exit (kernel/kthread.c:331)
[ 2.807537][ T2] ? do_raw_spin_unlock (arch/x86/include/asm/atomic.h:29 include/linux/atomic/atomic-instrumented.h:28 include/asm-generic/qspinlock.h:57 kernel/locking/spinlock_debug.c:100 kernel/locking/spinlock_debug.c:140)
[ 2.807537][ T2] kthreadd (kernel/kthread.c:400 kernel/kthread.c:746)
[ 2.807537][ T2] ? kthread_is_per_cpu (kernel/kthread.c:719)
[ 2.807537][ T2] ret_from_fork (arch/x86/entry/entry_64.S:314)
[ 2.807537][ T2] </TASK>


--
0-DAY CI Kernel Test Service
https://github.com/intel/lkp-tests


Attachments:
(No filename) (4.02 kB)
config-6.3.0-rc4-00162-ga53ab2ba098e (164.10 kB)
job-script (4.74 kB)
dmesg.xz (28.19 kB)
Download all attachments

2023-04-06 09:52:12

by Christian Brauner

[permalink] [raw]
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/3] cgroup/cpuset: Make cpuset_fork() handle CLONE_INTO_CGROUP properly

On Fri, Mar 31, 2023 at 10:50:43AM -0400, Waiman Long wrote:
> By default, the clone(2) syscall spawn a child process into the same
> cgroup as its parent. With the use of the CLONE_INTO_CGROUP flag
> introduced by commit ef2c41cf38a7 ("clone3: allow spawning processes
> into cgroups"), the child will be spawned into a different cgroup which
> is somewhat similar to writing the child's tid into "cgroup.threads".
>
> The current cpuset_fork() method does not properly handle the
> CLONE_INTO_CGROUP case where the cpuset of the child may be different
> from that of its parent. Update the cpuset_fork() method to treat the
> CLONE_INTO_CGROUP case similar to cpuset_attach().
>
> Since the newly cloned task has not been running yet, its actual
> memory usage isn't known. So it is not necessary to make change to mm
> in cpuset_fork().
>
> Fixes: ef2c41cf38a7 ("clone3: allow spawning processes into cgroups")
> Signed-off-by: Waiman Long <[email protected]>
> ---

Just two nits. I think this needs a Cc stable and it would be nice if
you could give Giuseppe a "Reported-by".

2023-04-06 09:52:32

by Christian Brauner

[permalink] [raw]
Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/3] cgroup/cpuset: Allow only one active attach operation per cpuset

On Fri, Mar 31, 2023 at 10:50:45AM -0400, Waiman Long wrote:
> The current cpuset code uses the global cpuset_attach_old_cs variable
> to store the old cpuset value between consecutive cpuset_can_attach()
> and cpuset_attach() calls. Since a caller of cpuset_can_attach() may
> not need to hold the global cgroup_threadgroup_rwsem, parallel cpuset
> attach operations are possible.
>
> When there are concurrent cpuset attach operations in progress,
> cpuset_attach() may fetch the wrong value from cpuset_attach_old_cs
> causing incorrect result. To avoid this problem while still allowing
> certain level of parallelism, drop cpuset_attach_old_cs and use a
> per-cpuset attach_old_cs value. Also restrict to at most one active
> attach operation per cpuset to avoid corrupting the value of the
> per-cpuset attach_old_cs value.
>
> Signed-off-by: Waiman Long <[email protected]>
> ---
> kernel/cgroup/cpuset.c | 19 ++++++++++++++-----
> 1 file changed, 14 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/kernel/cgroup/cpuset.c b/kernel/cgroup/cpuset.c
> index 2367de611c42..3f925c261513 100644
> --- a/kernel/cgroup/cpuset.c
> +++ b/kernel/cgroup/cpuset.c
> @@ -198,6 +198,8 @@ struct cpuset {
>
> /* Handle for cpuset.cpus.partition */
> struct cgroup_file partition_file;
> +
> + struct cpuset *attach_old_cs;
> };
>
> /*
> @@ -2456,22 +2458,27 @@ static int fmeter_getrate(struct fmeter *fmp)
> return val;
> }
>
> -static struct cpuset *cpuset_attach_old_cs;
> -
> /* Called by cgroups to determine if a cpuset is usable; cpuset_rwsem held */
> static int cpuset_can_attach(struct cgroup_taskset *tset)
> {
> struct cgroup_subsys_state *css;
> - struct cpuset *cs;
> + struct cpuset *cs, *oldcs;
> struct task_struct *task;
> int ret;
>
> /* used later by cpuset_attach() */
> - cpuset_attach_old_cs = task_cs(cgroup_taskset_first(tset, &css));
> + oldcs = task_cs(cgroup_taskset_first(tset, &css));
> cs = css_cs(css);
>
> percpu_down_write(&cpuset_rwsem);
>
> + /*
> + * Only one cpuset attach operation is allowed for each cpuset.
> + */
> + ret = -EBUSY;
> + if (cs->attach_in_progress)
> + goto out_unlock;

That'll mean CLONE_INTO_CGROUP becomes even more interestig because it
isn't subject to this restriction in contrast to fork()+migrate, right?

2023-04-06 12:38:25

by Waiman Long

[permalink] [raw]
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/3] cgroup/cpuset: Make cpuset_fork() handle CLONE_INTO_CGROUP properly

On 4/5/23 22:51, kernel test robot wrote:
> Hello,
>
> kernel test robot noticed "WARNING:suspicious_RCU_usage" on:
>
> commit: a53ab2ba098e6839db602212831c8b62a38c2956 ("[PATCH 1/3] cgroup/cpuset: Make cpuset_fork() handle CLONE_INTO_CGROUP properly")
> url: https://github.com/intel-lab-lkp/linux/commits/Waiman-Long/cgroup-cpuset-Make-cpuset_fork-handle-CLONE_INTO_CGROUP-properly/20230331-225527
> base: https://git.kernel.org/cgit/linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux.git 62bad54b26db8bc98e28749cd76b2d890edb4258
> patch link: https://lore.kernel.org/all/[email protected]/
> patch subject: [PATCH 1/3] cgroup/cpuset: Make cpuset_fork() handle CLONE_INTO_CGROUP properly
>
> in testcase: boot
>
> compiler: gcc-11
> test machine: qemu-system-x86_64 -enable-kvm -cpu SandyBridge -smp 2 -m 16G
>
> (please refer to attached dmesg/kmsg for entire log/backtrace)
>
>
> If you fix the issue, kindly add following tag
> | Reported-by: kernel test robot <[email protected]>
> | Link: https://lore.kernel.org/oe-lkp/[email protected]
>
>
> [ 2.798551][ T2] WARNING: suspicious RCU usage
> [ 2.799473][ T2] 6.3.0-rc4-00162-ga53ab2ba098e #1 Not tainted
> [ 2.799901][ T2] -----------------------------
> [ 2.800551][ T2] include/linux/cgroup.h:437 suspicious rcu_dereference_check() usage!
> [ 2.802044][ T2]
> [ 2.802044][ T2] other info that might help us debug this:
> [ 2.802044][ T2]
> [ 2.803158][ T2]
> [ 2.803158][ T2] rcu_scheduler_active = 1, debug_locks = 1
> [ 2.804024][ T2] 1 lock held by kthreadd/2:
> [ 2.804851][ T2] #0: ffffffff84c38230 (cgroup_threadgroup_rwsem){.+.+}-{0:0}, at: cgroup_can_fork (kernel/cgroup/cgroup.c:6515)
> [ 2.806112][ T2]
> [ 2.806112][ T2] stack backtrace:
> [ 2.806958][ T2] CPU: 0 PID: 2 Comm: kthreadd Not tainted 6.3.0-rc4-00162-ga53ab2ba098e #1
> [ 2.807537][ T2] Hardware name: QEMU Standard PC (i440FX + PIIX, 1996), BIOS 1.16.0-debian-1.16.0-5 04/01/2014
> [ 2.807537][ T2] Call Trace:
> [ 2.807537][ T2] <TASK>
> [ 2.807537][ T2] dump_stack_lvl (lib/dump_stack.c:107)
> [ 2.807537][ T2] lockdep_rcu_suspicious (include/linux/context_tracking.h:153 kernel/locking/lockdep.c:6600)
> [ 2.807537][ T2] cpuset_fork (include/linux/cgroup.h:437 kernel/cgroup/cpuset.c:240 kernel/cgroup/cpuset.c:3262)
> [ 2.807537][ T2] cgroup_post_fork (kernel/cgroup/cgroup.c:6635 (discriminator 6))
> [ 2.807537][ T2] ? cgroup_cancel_fork (kernel/cgroup/cgroup.c:6573)
> [ 2.807537][ T2] ? mark_held_locks (kernel/locking/lockdep.c:4237)
> [ 2.807537][ T2] ? lockdep_hardirqs_on_prepare (kernel/locking/lockdep.c:4529)
> [ 2.807537][ T2] copy_process (kernel/fork.c:2499)
> [ 2.807537][ T2] ? __cleanup_sighand (kernel/fork.c:2013)
> [ 2.807537][ T2] ? __lock_acquire (kernel/locking/lockdep.c:186 kernel/locking/lockdep.c:3836 kernel/locking/lockdep.c:5056)
> [ 2.807537][ T2] kernel_clone (include/linux/random.h:26 kernel/fork.c:2680)
> [ 2.807537][ T2] ? create_io_thread (kernel/fork.c:2639)
> [ 2.807537][ T2] ? mark_usage (kernel/locking/lockdep.c:4914)
> [ 2.807537][ T2] ? finish_task_switch+0x21c/0x910
> [ 2.807537][ T2] ? __switch_to (arch/x86/include/asm/bitops.h:55 include/asm-generic/bitops/instrumented-atomic.h:29 include/linux/thread_info.h:89 arch/x86/include/asm/fpu/sched.h:65 arch/x86/kernel/process_64.c:623)
> [ 2.807537][ T2] kernel_thread (kernel/fork.c:2729)
> [ 2.807537][ T2] ? __ia32_sys_clone3 (kernel/fork.c:2729)
> [ 2.807537][ T2] ? lock_downgrade (kernel/locking/lockdep.c:5321)
> [ 2.807537][ T2] ? kthread_complete_and_exit (kernel/kthread.c:331)
> [ 2.807537][ T2] ? do_raw_spin_unlock (arch/x86/include/asm/atomic.h:29 include/linux/atomic/atomic-instrumented.h:28 include/asm-generic/qspinlock.h:57 kernel/locking/spinlock_debug.c:100 kernel/locking/spinlock_debug.c:140)
> [ 2.807537][ T2] kthreadd (kernel/kthread.c:400 kernel/kthread.c:746)
> [ 2.807537][ T2] ? kthread_is_per_cpu (kernel/kthread.c:719)
> [ 2.807537][ T2] ret_from_fork (arch/x86/entry/entry_64.S:314)
> [ 2.807537][ T2] </TASK>
>
It looks like task_cs() can only be used under rcu_read_lock(). I will
update the patch to add that.

Thanks,
Longman

2023-04-06 14:12:10

by Waiman Long

[permalink] [raw]
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/3] cgroup/cpuset: Make cpuset_fork() handle CLONE_INTO_CGROUP properly

On 4/6/23 05:45, Christian Brauner wrote:
> On Fri, Mar 31, 2023 at 10:50:43AM -0400, Waiman Long wrote:
>> By default, the clone(2) syscall spawn a child process into the same
>> cgroup as its parent. With the use of the CLONE_INTO_CGROUP flag
>> introduced by commit ef2c41cf38a7 ("clone3: allow spawning processes
>> into cgroups"), the child will be spawned into a different cgroup which
>> is somewhat similar to writing the child's tid into "cgroup.threads".
>>
>> The current cpuset_fork() method does not properly handle the
>> CLONE_INTO_CGROUP case where the cpuset of the child may be different
>> from that of its parent. Update the cpuset_fork() method to treat the
>> CLONE_INTO_CGROUP case similar to cpuset_attach().
>>
>> Since the newly cloned task has not been running yet, its actual
>> memory usage isn't known. So it is not necessary to make change to mm
>> in cpuset_fork().
>>
>> Fixes: ef2c41cf38a7 ("clone3: allow spawning processes into cgroups")
>> Signed-off-by: Waiman Long <[email protected]>
>> ---
> Just two nits. I think this needs a Cc stable and it would be nice if
> you could give Giuseppe a "Reported-by".

The presence of a fixes tag should make this patch picked up by stable.
Yes, I will cc stable when I need to update the patch next time.

Right, I should have added

Reported-by: Giuseppe Scrivano <[email protected]>

Cheers,
Longman

2023-04-07 15:35:51

by Waiman Long

[permalink] [raw]
Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/3] cgroup/cpuset: Allow only one active attach operation per cpuset

On 4/6/23 05:44, Christian Brauner wrote:
> On Fri, Mar 31, 2023 at 10:50:45AM -0400, Waiman Long wrote:
>> The current cpuset code uses the global cpuset_attach_old_cs variable
>> to store the old cpuset value between consecutive cpuset_can_attach()
>> and cpuset_attach() calls. Since a caller of cpuset_can_attach() may
>> not need to hold the global cgroup_threadgroup_rwsem, parallel cpuset
>> attach operations are possible.
>>
>> When there are concurrent cpuset attach operations in progress,
>> cpuset_attach() may fetch the wrong value from cpuset_attach_old_cs
>> causing incorrect result. To avoid this problem while still allowing
>> certain level of parallelism, drop cpuset_attach_old_cs and use a
>> per-cpuset attach_old_cs value. Also restrict to at most one active
>> attach operation per cpuset to avoid corrupting the value of the
>> per-cpuset attach_old_cs value.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Waiman Long <[email protected]>
>> ---
>> kernel/cgroup/cpuset.c | 19 ++++++++++++++-----
>> 1 file changed, 14 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/kernel/cgroup/cpuset.c b/kernel/cgroup/cpuset.c
>> index 2367de611c42..3f925c261513 100644
>> --- a/kernel/cgroup/cpuset.c
>> +++ b/kernel/cgroup/cpuset.c
>> @@ -198,6 +198,8 @@ struct cpuset {
>>
>> /* Handle for cpuset.cpus.partition */
>> struct cgroup_file partition_file;
>> +
>> + struct cpuset *attach_old_cs;
>> };
>>
>> /*
>> @@ -2456,22 +2458,27 @@ static int fmeter_getrate(struct fmeter *fmp)
>> return val;
>> }
>>
>> -static struct cpuset *cpuset_attach_old_cs;
>> -
>> /* Called by cgroups to determine if a cpuset is usable; cpuset_rwsem held */
>> static int cpuset_can_attach(struct cgroup_taskset *tset)
>> {
>> struct cgroup_subsys_state *css;
>> - struct cpuset *cs;
>> + struct cpuset *cs, *oldcs;
>> struct task_struct *task;
>> int ret;
>>
>> /* used later by cpuset_attach() */
>> - cpuset_attach_old_cs = task_cs(cgroup_taskset_first(tset, &css));
>> + oldcs = task_cs(cgroup_taskset_first(tset, &css));
>> cs = css_cs(css);
>>
>> percpu_down_write(&cpuset_rwsem);
>>
>> + /*
>> + * Only one cpuset attach operation is allowed for each cpuset.
>> + */
>> + ret = -EBUSY;
>> + if (cs->attach_in_progress)
>> + goto out_unlock;
> That'll mean CLONE_INTO_CGROUP becomes even more interestig because it
> isn't subject to this restriction in contrast to fork()+migrate, right?

This patch is not related to the CLONE_INTO_CGROUP. In fact, I have
dropped that in latter version.

Cheers,
Longman

2023-04-09 11:50:07

by Christian Brauner

[permalink] [raw]
Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/3] cgroup/cpuset: Allow only one active attach operation per cpuset

On Fri, Apr 07, 2023 at 11:30:14AM -0400, Waiman Long wrote:
> On 4/6/23 05:44, Christian Brauner wrote:
> > On Fri, Mar 31, 2023 at 10:50:45AM -0400, Waiman Long wrote:
> > > The current cpuset code uses the global cpuset_attach_old_cs variable
> > > to store the old cpuset value between consecutive cpuset_can_attach()
> > > and cpuset_attach() calls. Since a caller of cpuset_can_attach() may
> > > not need to hold the global cgroup_threadgroup_rwsem, parallel cpuset
> > > attach operations are possible.
> > >
> > > When there are concurrent cpuset attach operations in progress,
> > > cpuset_attach() may fetch the wrong value from cpuset_attach_old_cs
> > > causing incorrect result. To avoid this problem while still allowing
> > > certain level of parallelism, drop cpuset_attach_old_cs and use a
> > > per-cpuset attach_old_cs value. Also restrict to at most one active
> > > attach operation per cpuset to avoid corrupting the value of the
> > > per-cpuset attach_old_cs value.
> > >
> > > Signed-off-by: Waiman Long <[email protected]>
> > > ---
> > > kernel/cgroup/cpuset.c | 19 ++++++++++++++-----
> > > 1 file changed, 14 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)
> > >
> > > diff --git a/kernel/cgroup/cpuset.c b/kernel/cgroup/cpuset.c
> > > index 2367de611c42..3f925c261513 100644
> > > --- a/kernel/cgroup/cpuset.c
> > > +++ b/kernel/cgroup/cpuset.c
> > > @@ -198,6 +198,8 @@ struct cpuset {
> > > /* Handle for cpuset.cpus.partition */
> > > struct cgroup_file partition_file;
> > > +
> > > + struct cpuset *attach_old_cs;
> > > };
> > > /*
> > > @@ -2456,22 +2458,27 @@ static int fmeter_getrate(struct fmeter *fmp)
> > > return val;
> > > }
> > > -static struct cpuset *cpuset_attach_old_cs;
> > > -
> > > /* Called by cgroups to determine if a cpuset is usable; cpuset_rwsem held */
> > > static int cpuset_can_attach(struct cgroup_taskset *tset)
> > > {
> > > struct cgroup_subsys_state *css;
> > > - struct cpuset *cs;
> > > + struct cpuset *cs, *oldcs;
> > > struct task_struct *task;
> > > int ret;
> > > /* used later by cpuset_attach() */
> > > - cpuset_attach_old_cs = task_cs(cgroup_taskset_first(tset, &css));
> > > + oldcs = task_cs(cgroup_taskset_first(tset, &css));
> > > cs = css_cs(css);
> > > percpu_down_write(&cpuset_rwsem);
> > > + /*
> > > + * Only one cpuset attach operation is allowed for each cpuset.
> > > + */
> > > + ret = -EBUSY;
> > > + if (cs->attach_in_progress)
> > > + goto out_unlock;
> > That'll mean CLONE_INTO_CGROUP becomes even more interestig because it
> > isn't subject to this restriction in contrast to fork()+migrate, right?
>
> This patch is not related to the CLONE_INTO_CGROUP. In fact, I have dropped

I know that. My point had been that this patch introduced a new
restriction affecting parallelism in the migration path while the
CLONE_INTO_CGROUP path remained unaffected.