On Wed, Sep 05, 2012 at 05:19:22PM +0800, Tang Chen wrote: > Hi Viktor, > > On 09/05/2012 04:54 PM, Viktor Mihajlovski wrote: > >I posted a comment some time ago about that. If you do not mount the > >cpuset controller, i.e for RHEL 6 you delete the cpuset line from > >/etc/cgconfig, the CPU affinity isn't controlled by cgroups any more but > >uses the old mechanism, which works as expected: take a host CPU offline > >and it will be removed from the process CPU mask and will show up again > >after onlining the host CPU. > >The only issue I currently see is that the display of virsh vcpuinfo and > >vcpupin is somewhat strange. Using taskset will however show the the > >correct affinity. > > > >I suggest that you try out that approach. > > I saw your comment before. You are quite right. :) > > But the situation here is there are some other features in libvirt > using cpuset. For example, emulator-pin feature. If we remove cpuset in > the system, other features could be unusable. The emulator pinning code should be made to use sched_setaffinity() when the cpuset controller is not available, just as we do for the vCPU pinning. > And more, I found different cgroups are widely used in libvirt now. > I don't think removing cgroups from system is a good enough idea, though > it can be a work around. > > What do you think? :) Either the kernel fixes the broken cpuset behaviour, or we have to recommend that people don't use it. Daniel -- |: http://berrange.com -o- http://www.flickr.com/photos/dberrange/ :| |: http://libvirt.org -o- http://virt-manager.org :| |: http://autobuild.org -o- http://search.cpan.org/~danberr/ :| |: http://entangle-photo.org -o- http://live.gnome.org/gtk-vnc :| -- libvir-list mailing list libvir-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/libvir-list