Received-SPF: pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) client-ip=209.132.180.67;
Date:   Fri, 27 Jul 2018 09:48:51 +0200
From:   Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
To:     Cheng Lin <cheng.lin130@zte.com.cn>
Cc:     mingo@redhat.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
        jiang.biao2@zte.com.cn, zhong.weidong@zte.com.cn,
        tan.hu@zte.com.cn.cn
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] sched/numa: do not balance tasks onto isolated cpus
Message-ID: <20180727074851.GY2494@hirez.programming.kicks-ass.net>
References: <1532593148-106266-1-git-send-email-cheng.lin130@zte.com.cn>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <1532593148-106266-1-git-send-email-cheng.lin130@zte.com.cn>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.10.0 (2018-05-17)
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Precedence: bulk

On Thu, Jul 26, 2018 at 04:19:08PM +0800, Cheng Lin wrote:
> -	if (!cpumask_test_cpu(arg.dst_cpu, &arg.src_task->cpus_allowed))
> +	if ((!cpumask_test_cpu(arg.dst_cpu, &arg.src_task->cpus_allowed))
> +		|| !housekeeping_test_cpu(arg.dst_cpu, HK_FLAG_DOMAIN))
>  		goto out;

You did not read the comment I provided last time. Using isolcpus (and
thus it's renamed houskeeping thing) is the wrong thing to do. Load
balancing should be limited to it's root domain.