From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Oleg Nesterov Subject: Re: cgroup attach task - slogging cpu Date: Wed, 9 Oct 2013 16:05:51 +0200 Message-ID: <20131009140551.GA15849@redhat.com> References: <20131004130207.GA9338@redhat.com> <20131007184507.GD27396@htj.dyndns.org> <20131008145833.GA15600@redhat.com> <5254EB2A.7090803@huawei.com> <20131009133047.GA12414@redhat.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Return-path: Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20131009133047.GA12414-H+wXaHxf7aLQT0dZR+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 , anjana vk , cgroups-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org On 10/09, Oleg Nesterov wrote: > > On 10/09, Li Zefan wrote: > > > > Anjana, could you revise the patch and send it out with proper changelog > > and Signed-off-by? And please add "Cc: # 3.9+" > > Yes, Anjana, please! Please note also that the PF_EXITING check has the same problem, it also needs "goto next". > > > check in the main loop. So Anjana was right (sorry again!), and we > > > should probably do > > > > > > ent.cgrp = task_cgroup_from_root(...); > > > if (ent.cgrp != cgrp) { > > > retval = flex_array_put(...); > > > ... > > > } > > > > > > if (!threadgroup) > > > break; > > > > > > > Or > > > > do { > > ... > > if (ent.cgrp == cgrp) > > goto next; > > Or this, agreed. > > > > Or I am wrong again? > > > > No, you are not! :) > > Thanks ;) > > Oleg.