Hello, On Thu, Sep 17, 2015 at 04:35:27PM +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote: > On Sat, Sep 12, 2015 at 10:40:07AM -0400, Tejun Heo wrote: > > So, one of the problems is that the kernel can't have tasks w/o > > runnable CPUs, so we have to some workaround when, for whatever > > reason, a task ends up with no CPU that it can run on. > > No, just refuse that configuration. Well, you've been saying that but that's not our behavior on cpu hotunplug either and it applies the same. If we reject cpu hotunplugs while tasks are affined to it, we can do the same in cpuset too. > > The kernel does not update all CPU affinity masks when a CPU goes down > > or comes up. > > I'd be happy to fail a CPU down for user tasks where this is the last > runnable CPU of. So, yeah, we need to keep these things consistent across global and cgroup cases. Thanks. -- tejun -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe cgroups" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
