From: Oleg Nesterov <oleg@tv-sign.ru>
To: "Eric W. Biederman" <ebiederm@xmission.com>
Cc: Andrew Morton <akpm@osdl.org>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
Linux Containers <containers@lists.osdl.org>,
Alan Cox <alan@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] vt: Rework the console spawning variables.
Date: Mon, 11 Sep 2006 00:33:42 +0400 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20060910203324.GA121@oleg> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <m18xkreb42.fsf@ebiederm.dsl.xmission.com>
On 09/10, Eric W. Biederman wrote:
>
> Oleg Nesterov <oleg@tv-sign.ru> writes:
>
> > On 09/09, Eric W. Biederman wrote:
> >>
> >> This patch does several things.
> >> - The variables used are moved into a structure and declared in vt_kern.h
> >> - A spinlock is added so we don't have SMP races updating the values.
> >> - Instead of raw pid_t value a struct_pid is used to guard against
> >> pid wrap around issues, if the daemon to spawn a new console dies.
> >
> > I am not arguing against this patch, but it's a pity we can't use 'struct pid'
> > lockless. What dou you think about this:
>
> Actually with xchg I can use a reference counted struct pid lockless.
>
> ...
>
> Perhaps:
> void update_pid(struct pid **ref, struct pid *new)
> {
> struct pid *old;
> get_pid(new);
> old = xchg(ref, new);
> put_pid(old);
> }
This can't work. This put_pid() can actually free the memory, while
'old' is still in use (lockless).
> rcu is definitely not the solution in these cases as the struct pid
> is stored for a long time so we need the reference count.
Surely we need the reference count, I don't understand you.
Look at put_pid_rcu().
That said,
> In the general case you have more then one variable you want to keep
> in sync and you need the lock for that.
Yes.
> But since I can write it as a moderately clear one liner in the
> case that matters I don't much care.
Ok.
Oleg.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2006-09-10 20:33 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 9+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2006-09-10 4:21 [PATCH] vt: Rework the console spawning variables Eric W. Biederman
2006-09-10 14:29 ` Oleg Nesterov
2006-09-10 20:10 ` Eric W. Biederman
2006-09-10 20:33 ` Oleg Nesterov [this message]
2006-09-10 22:56 ` Eric W. Biederman
2006-09-11 1:05 ` Oleg Nesterov
2006-09-11 2:40 ` Eric W. Biederman
2006-09-11 2:59 ` Oleg Nesterov
2006-09-11 5:01 ` Eric W. Biederman
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=20060910203324.GA121@oleg \
--to=oleg@tv-sign.ru \
--cc=akpm@osdl.org \
--cc=alan@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk \
--cc=containers@lists.osdl.org \
--cc=ebiederm@xmission.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
/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