From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1753998Ab1LWA7T (ORCPT ); Thu, 22 Dec 2011 19:59:19 -0500 Received: from mail-iy0-f174.google.com ([209.85.210.174]:53411 "EHLO mail-iy0-f174.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753055Ab1LWA7Q (ORCPT ); Thu, 22 Dec 2011 19:59:16 -0500 Date: Thu, 22 Dec 2011 16:58:57 -0800 From: Mandeep Singh Baines To: Tejun Heo Cc: Mandeep Singh Baines , Li Zefan , Frederic Weisbecker , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, containers@lists.linux-foundation.org, cgroups@vger.kernel.org, KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki , Oleg Nesterov , Andrew Morton , Paul Menage Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] cgroup: remove tasklist_lock from cgroup_attach_proc Message-ID: <20111223005857.GL13529@google.com> References: <1324592816-13792-1-git-send-email-msb@chromium.org> <20111222225102.GM17084@google.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20111222225102.GM17084@google.com> X-Operating-System: Linux/2.6.38.8-gg621 (x86_64) User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.20 (2009-06-14) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Tejun Heo (tj@kernel.org) wrote: > Hello, > > On Thu, Dec 22, 2011 at 02:26:55PM -0800, Mandeep Singh Baines wrote: > > @@ -2283,14 +2261,26 @@ static int attach_task_by_pid(struct cgroup *cgrp, u64 pid, bool threadgroup) > > > > threadgroup_lock(tsk); > > > > - if (threadgroup) > > + if (threadgroup) { > > + if (!thread_group_leader(tsk)) { > > + /* > > + * a race with de_thread from another thread's exec() > > + * may strip us of our leadership, if this happens, > > + * there is no choice but to throw this task away and > > + * try again (from cgroup_procs_write); this is > > + * "double-double-toil-and-trouble-check locking". > > + */ > > + ret = -EAGAIN; > > + goto out_unlock_threadgroup; > > + } > > ret = cgroup_attach_proc(cgrp, tsk); > > Ummm... can't we just do tsk = tsk->leader after locking threadgroup? You're right. Nice! New series coming up. > Why do we need to retry from the beginning? > > Thanks. > > -- > tejun