Date:   Tue, 7 Feb 2023 11:32:29 +0000
From:   Will Deacon <will@kernel.org>
To:     Tejun Heo <tj@kernel.org>
Cc:     Waiman Long <longman@redhat.com>,
        Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>,
        Zefan Li <lizefan.x@bytedance.com>,
        Johannes Weiner <hannes@cmpxchg.org>,
        linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, cgroups@vger.kernel.org,
        kernel-team@android.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH] cgroup/cpuset: Don't filter offline CPUs in
 cpuset_cpus_allowed() for top cpuset tasks
Message-ID: <20230207113228.GB12147@willie-the-truck>
References: <20230203164040.213437-1-longman@redhat.com>
 <Y94s8mzrE9VyUJLa@hirez.programming.kicks-ass.net>
 <f356b916-1c10-1565-73fb-34027c6c510a@redhat.com>
 <20230206110540.GA11024@willie-the-truck>
 <Y+FgQXvnzSF1OrmO@slm.duckdns.org>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <Y+FgQXvnzSF1OrmO@slm.duckdns.org>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.10.1 (2018-07-13)
Precedence: bulk

On Mon, Feb 06, 2023 at 10:17:05AM -1000, Tejun Heo wrote:
> On Mon, Feb 06, 2023 at 11:05:41AM +0000, Will Deacon wrote:
> > > If we want to get it into the next merge windows, there isn't much time left
> > > for linux-next testing. So a lower risk solution is better from that
> > > perspective too.
> > 
> > This needs to land for 6.2 to fix the regression. The next merge window is
> > too late. That's why I cooked the reverts [1] as an alternative.
> 
> Yeah, I think Waiman meant before the coming merge window. We have at least
> one more week so let's try the two patches and see how that goes. We can
> always revert if it doesn't work out.

I see this has landed in Linus' tree now, so thanks for that! I also tested
his branch just to make sure and it all seems fine in my asymmetric
environment.

Cheers,

Will