On 2023/6/19 22:37, Waiman Long wrote:
> On 6/17/23 04:30, Miaohe Lin wrote:
>> The tsk->mems_allowed is changed before calling mpol_rebind_task() and
>> being reassigned right after it. But tsk->mems_allowed is not needed
>> inside mpol_rebind_task(). So remove unneeded tsk->mems_allowed modify
>> via nodes_or() here.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Miaohe Lin <linmiaohe@xxxxxxxxxx>
>> ---
>> kernel/cgroup/cpuset.c | 1 -
>> 1 file changed, 1 deletion(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/kernel/cgroup/cpuset.c b/kernel/cgroup/cpuset.c
>> index 58e6f18f01c1..33a429c1179f 100644
>> --- a/kernel/cgroup/cpuset.c
>> +++ b/kernel/cgroup/cpuset.c
>> @@ -1941,7 +1941,6 @@ static void cpuset_change_task_nodemask(struct task_struct *tsk,
>> local_irq_disable();
>> write_seqcount_begin(&tsk->mems_allowed_seq);
>> - nodes_or(tsk->mems_allowed, tsk->mems_allowed, *newmems);
>> mpol_rebind_task(tsk, newmems);
>> tsk->mems_allowed = *newmems;
>>
>
> That line was inserted by commit cc9a6c8776615 ("cpuset: mm: reduce large amounts of memory barrier related damage v3"). At first glance, it does looks like it is not necessary. However, I am not sure if a race is possible that will produce a false failure because of missing this line.
>
Thanks for your comment. IMHO, the code is protected with mems_allowed_seq seqlock. So it should be fine even if there's a race.
I will take a closer look to make sure whether race exists.
> My 2 cents.
Thanks.
>
> Cheers,
> Longman
>
> .
