From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Oleg Nesterov Subject: [PATCH 0/1] do not abuse ->cred_guard_mutex in threadgroup_lock() Date: Sat, 9 Mar 2013 21:00:46 +0100 Message-ID: <20130309200046.GA8149@redhat.com> References: <20130306223657.GA7392@redhat.com> <20130307172545.GA10353@redhat.com> <20130307180139.GD29601@htj.dyndns.org> <20130307180332.GE29601@htj.dyndns.org> <20130307191242.GA18265@redhat.com> <20130307193820.GB3209@htj.dyndns.org> <513A9A67.60909@huawei.com> <20130309032936.GT14556@mtj.dyndns.org> <513AE918.7020704@huawei.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Return-path: Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <513AE918.7020704-hv44wF8Li93QT0dZR+AlfA@public.gmane.org> Sender: cgroups-owner-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org List-ID: Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit To: Li Zefan Cc: Tejun Heo , Dave Jones , Linux Kernel , Alexander Viro , cgroups-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org On 03/09, Li Zefan wrote: > > We don't need both patches for 3.9, so we'll queue Oleg's fix for 3.9 and > yours for 3.10? Well. OK, please see 1/1 (compile tested only). But I still like the patch from Tejun more... Except _perhaps_ my patch is better for 3.9 just because it is simpler. And. I still think that probably we can avoid thread_group_leader() recheck-and-restart logic in attach_task_by_pid(). But even if this is true (and thus we can revert the changes in de_thread), we should do this on top of Tejun's patch. Oleg.