Re: [PATCH 2/5] cgroup/cpuset: Add new cpus.partition type with no load balancing

Hello,

Generally looks fine to me.

On Thu, Jun 03, 2021 at 05:24:13PM -0400, Waiman Long wrote:

@@ -1984,12 +1987,31 @@ static int update_prstate(struct cpuset *cs, int val) goto out; err = update_parent_subparts_cpumask(cs, partcmd_enable,

• 				     NULL, &tmp);
  

• 				     NULL, &tmpmask);
  

• if (err) { update_flag(CS_CPU_EXCLUSIVE, cs, 0); goto out;

• } else if (new_prs == PRS_ENABLED_NOLB) {
  

• 	/*
  

• 	 * Disable the load balance flag should not return an
  

^ing

and "else if" after "if (err) goto out" block is weird. The two conditions don't need to be tied together.

@@ -2518,6 +2547,9 @@ static int sched_partition_show(struct seq_file *seq, void *v) case PRS_ENABLED: seq_puts(seq, "root\n"); break;

• case PRS_ENABLED_NOLB:

• seq_puts(seq, "root-nolb\n");
  

• break;
  

  case PRS_DISABLED: seq_puts(seq, "member\n"); break;

@@ -2544,6 +2576,8 @@ static ssize_t sched_partition_write(struct kernfs_open_file *of, char *buf, val = PRS_ENABLED; else if (!strcmp(buf, "member")) val = PRS_DISABLED;

• else if (!strcmp(buf, "root-nolb"))

• val = PRS_ENABLED_NOLB;
  

  else return -EINVAL;

I wonder whether there's a better name than "root-nolb" because nolb isn't the most readable and we are using space as the delimiter for other names. Would something like "isolated" work?

Thanks.