Hello, Li. On Fri, Apr 19, 2013 at 08:27:05PM +0800, Li Zefan wrote: > I think this was introduced unintentionally when cpuset hotplug was > made asynchronous. Fortunately it does no harm, as updating tasks' > cpumask will just return failure and there's a guarantee_online_mems() > when updating nodemask, and then the tasks will be moved to an ancestor > cpuset. Yeah, which will update the masks to the proper values anyway, so it was intentionally written that way as it didn't really matter either way. I suppose this helps future changes? Maybe update the description a bit? Thanks. -- tejun _______________________________________________ Containers mailing list Containers@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/containers
