From: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
To: Oleg Nesterov <oleg@tv-sign.ru>
Cc: Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>, Andrew Morton <akpm@osdl.org>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [patch 1/3] Drop tasklist lock in do_sched_setscheduler
Date: Sun, 25 Jun 2006 17:35:46 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <1151249747.25491.378.camel@localhost.localdomain> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20060625005045.GA155@oleg>
On Sun, 2006-06-25 at 04:50 +0400, Oleg Nesterov wrote:
> Thomas Gleixner wrote:
> >
> > There is no need to hold tasklist_lock across the setscheduler call, when we
> > pin the task structure with get_task_struct(). Interrupts are disabled in
> > setscheduler anyway and the permission checks do not need interrupts disabled.
> >
> > --- linux-2.6.17-mm.orig/kernel/sched.c 2006-06-22 10:26:11.000000000 +0200
> > +++ linux-2.6.17-mm/kernel/sched.c 2006-06-22 10:26:11.000000000 +0200
> > @@ -4140,8 +4140,10 @@
> > read_unlock_irq(&tasklist_lock);
> > return -ESRCH;
> > }
> > - retval = sched_setscheduler(p, policy, &lparam);
> > + get_task_struct(p);
> > read_unlock_irq(&tasklist_lock);
> > + retval = sched_setscheduler(p, policy, &lparam);
> > + put_task_struct(p);
> > return retval;
> > }
>
> But we don't need read_lock(tasklist) and get_task_struct(p) at all?
>
> rcu_read_lock/rcu_read_unlock is enough, no?
Probably yes, did not think about that
tglx
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2006-06-25 15:33 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 7+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2006-06-25 0:50 [patch 1/3] Drop tasklist lock in do_sched_setscheduler Oleg Nesterov
2006-06-25 15:35 ` Thomas Gleixner [this message]
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2006-06-22 9:08 [patch 0/3] rtmutex: Propagate priority setting into lock chains Thomas Gleixner
2006-06-22 9:08 ` [patch 1/3] Drop tasklist lock in do_sched_setscheduler Thomas Gleixner
2006-06-23 1:48 ` Andrew Morton
2006-06-23 6:01 ` Thomas Gleixner
2006-06-24 8:07 ` Andrew Morton
2006-06-24 8:25 ` Thomas Gleixner
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=1151249747.25491.378.camel@localhost.localdomain \
--to=tglx@linutronix.de \
--cc=akpm@osdl.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mingo@elte.hu \
--cc=oleg@tv-sign.ru \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox